455 replies to this topic

[Der Hesse]

The Phigment, on 01 April 2015 - 08:33 PM, said:

For all the people who seem to THINK they have a clue as to what is going on, perhaps need to go back to school and re-learn rational, logical thought.

So we lost 50+ planets, gained ZERO. We won 53% of the matches mind you, but only 6300 of the 8100+ matches played were IS vs Clan.
Of the WHOLE 8100+ matches played, only 2.8% were actually ghost drops.

So you babbling monkeys are saying that this was a case of the IS having greater numbers, and not that the argument that IS mechs are superior to Clan mechs has some merit?
Hmm, funny concept since those apparently significant numbers the IS fielded still only resulted ~200 ghost drops across over 8100 matches.

Ya see where your logic fails? Try harder next time. Or better yet, save those of us with greater than single digit IQs the pain of having to read your posts.

Interesting how always those people that don´t understand what´s going on call others dumb. ^^
You still didn´t figure out why IS got all those planets? Many people did explain it and even pgi did understand and changes the mechanic now because they did.
Ghost drops were not the problem. The mechanic was, where clans with lower playernumbers were stuck to defendmissions while defending planets and counterattacks when attacking because IS always had more teams waiting in queue.

So i suggest you drag your own single digit IQ monkey ass back to elementary school before calling others dumb.

Edit: Forgot to say: oooooook, ooook, ooooooooooooooook! *drums on his own chest*

Edited by Der Hesse, 01 April 2015 - 11:36 PM.

[Gyrok]

Der Hesse, on 01 April 2015 - 11:35 PM, said:

Interesting how always those people that don´t understand what´s going on call others dumb. ^^
You still didn´t figure out why IS got all those planets? Many people did explain it and even pgi did understand and changes the mechanic now because they did.
Ghost drops were not the problem. The mechanic was, where clans with lower playernumbers were stuck to defendmissions while defending planets and counterattacks when attacking because IS always had more teams waiting in queue.

So i suggest you drag your own single digit IQ monkey ass back to elementary school before calling others dumb.

Edit: Forgot to say: oooooook, ooook, ooooooooooooooook! *drums on his own chest*

Are you somehow still trying to tell people who are now informed that things are balanced that "Clamz OP"?

Go do something productive, please...like ride a barrel over niagara falls...

[Phelan Ward-Kell]

Der Hesse, on 01 April 2015 - 11:35 PM, said:

Interesting how always those people that don´t understand what´s going on call others dumb. ^^
You still didn´t figure out why IS got all those planets? Many people did explain it and even pgi did understand and changes the mechanic now because they did.
Ghost drops were not the problem. The mechanic was, where clans with lower playernumbers were stuck to defendmissions while defending planets and counterattacks when attacking because IS always had more teams waiting in queue.

So i suggest you drag your own single digit IQ monkey ass back to elementary school before calling others dumb.

Edit: Forgot to say: oooooook, ooook, ooooooooooooooook! *drums on his own chest*

I didn't state in any capacity that ghost drops were a problem, which reinforces my belief that people in this community either can't read, or can't understand plainly stated facts.
As for the broken mechanic in the system that Russ talked about, I did read that. If you had also read that, you would understand that what he was explaining only pertained to the TYPE of win (and in turn the reason for the disparity in planets trading sides), which DOES NOT pertain to why the number of wins were so near evenly distributed across the event

The core of my comments were directed at a few core groups of individuals.
1) The "Ghost drops are OP" group.
2) The "Clan mechs are OP" group.
3) The people who think that the IS' only advantage this weekend was superior numbers

The point I was making, which apparently I made slightly too vague for those incapable of extricating their craniums from their rectums for 30 seconds, was the fact that IS fields a much more significant quantity of PUGs than Clans do and yet still fights to almost even wins with us should indicate a few things.
1) That such groups of PUGs can defeat Clan mechs indicates a disparity in mech balance (NOT in favor of Clans)
2) That IS really has little to complain about, except your own shortcomings
3) That the Clans need to stop bickering among each other (inter and intra-clan bickering), and unify their responses to IS activity.



Again, to the people posting ******* replies: For the love of the ever-expanding universe, PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELVES!

Edited by The Phigment, 02 April 2015 - 06:21 AM.

[dervishx5]

lol @ people trying to e-peniz using IQs in this thread.

[Phelan Ward-Kell]

dervishx5, on 02 April 2015 - 06:25 AM, said:

lol @ people trying to e-peniz using IQs in this thread.

LOL @ people trying to perceive a pejorative as a measuring stick.

[dervishx5]

[CyclonerM]

Repasy, on 28 March 2015 - 10:32 AM, said:

And as far as last night goes, while it was a total defeat for the Clans, I have never been more excited playing ComWar!!! We finally get a taste of what ComWar could be like with a high player opt-in. This is what it should be like, with over a hundred players on each side fighting for planets!

But i suppose that it should not like that, winning 53% of the battles but gaining 0 planets :\

[Repasy Cooper]

CyclonerM, on 02 April 2015 - 06:56 AM, said:

But i suppose that it should not like that, winning 53% of the battles but gaining 0 planets :\

True that, ghost drops are a serious issue.

[Lily from animove]

Der Hesse, on 01 April 2015 - 08:33 AM, said:

3/17? Proof your numbers or i call it bullshit!

that numbers have been my 20 CW matches

http://imgur.com/a/f9los

[Mystere]

The Phigment, on 01 April 2015 - 08:33 PM, said:

For all the people who seem to THINK they have a clue as to what is going on, perhaps need to go back to school and re-learn rational, logical thought.

So we lost 50+ planets, gained ZERO. We won 53% of the matches mind you, but only 6300 of the 8100+ matches played were IS vs Clan.
Of the WHOLE 8100+ matches played, only 2.8% were actually ghost drops.

So you babbling monkeys are saying that this was a case of the IS having greater numbers, and not that the argument that IS mechs are superior to Clan mechs has some merit?
Hmm, funny concept since those apparently significant numbers the IS fielded still only resulted ~200 ghost drops across over 8100 matches.

Ya see where your logic fails? Try harder next time. Or better yet, save those of us with greater than single digit IQs the pain of having to read your posts.

Did you even understand Russ' announcement? I am asking because I have my doubts. That or I missed the gist of your own babbling.

[BARBAR0SSA]

Mystere, on 02 April 2015 - 07:03 AM, said:

Did you even understand Russ' announcement? I am asking because I have my doubts. That or I missed the gist of your own babbling.

Russ's announcement pretty much stated that in the CW matches of clan vs IS that it was a %53 win rate for clans, that has nothing to do with planet take overs. However how many of those wins/losses were due to light rushes? What was the elo disparity between matches as well? It would also shed some light on how balanced it is, if you have clan players with lower elo than IS players winning %53 of the time it's not as balanced as thought.

The planet losses would be more attributed to how the CW planet attacks are done and why they are putting a fix in for that.

[Phelan Ward-Kell]

Lily from animove, on 02 April 2015 - 07:03 AM, said:

that numbers have been my 20 CW matches

http://imgur.com/a/f9los

Nice scores Lily. If you ever find yourself in need of a unit, check out Delta Galaxy.

[Lily from animove]

Averen, on 01 April 2015 - 11:25 PM, said:

There were only 3% ghost drops, and clan won 53% of the ISvsClan games. They lost the planets because of an issue with CW mechanics, caused by the IS-queues being larger.

Look at the annoucements, Russ made writeup about the problem and findings.

too complicated for some people to understand


but some explanation:

When Is has higher numbers, they will do the following:

They will always attack, sicne they have the 12 man full first. this means the majority of the planets fields will be attacked, and from those majority 53% get lost.

IS still statistically won half (47%) the planet by just playing and attacking.

Now second time this happens because IS having the majority of players, "beginnign" the matchs, 47% so form the remaining 53% planet locations 47% will again fall to the IS.

after a few cycles, IS owns enough to get the planet.


Similar stuff happens on the defending planets. If attackers maage to get a field on the palnet, but defenders are the first ones to fill 2 people they will get a counterattack. makign it a 47% chance to claim back such a field.

The one filling the dropships firts, will have a chance to proceed to his goal. the one filling it last will only have a chance to prevent this goal form being reached. but with a 50:50 winratio, the side that always is owkring towards its goal, will win. because the other side can not entirely prevent this from happening.

To flip the table the other side would have to be first flling the dropship

clearly a mechanic issue of CW.

But not sure how this is going to be fixed, because the problem with a 50:50 winratio is, planets would nearly not flip anymore. because its more of a randomness now deciding on a 50/50 planet what the last match does. All previous matches will mostlikely keep a palnet on a rough 50/50 state.

Edited by Lily from animove, 02 April 2015 - 07:23 AM.

[Phelan Ward-Kell]

shad0w4life, on 02 April 2015 - 07:12 AM, said:

Russ's announcement pretty much stated that in the CW matches of clan vs IS that it was a %53 win rate for clans, that has nothing to do with planet take overs. However how many of those wins/losses were due to light rushes? What was the elo disparity between matches as well? It would also shed some light on how balanced it is, if you have clan players with lower elo than IS players winning %53 of the time it's not as balanced as thought.

The planet losses would be more attributed to how the CW planet attacks are done and why they are putting a fix in for that.

Very valid points Shad0w, and information I would be excited to get my hands on as well.

[Mystere]

shad0w4life, on 02 April 2015 - 07:12 AM, said:

Russ's announcement pretty much stated that in the CW matches of clan vs IS that it was a %53 win rate for clans, that has nothing to do with planet take overs.

And which is why I asked Phig my question.

shad0w4life, on 02 April 2015 - 07:12 AM, said:

However how many of those wins/losses were due to light rushes?

Does it really matter? I consider light rushes a valid tactic.

shad0w4life, on 02 April 2015 - 07:12 AM, said:

What was the elo disparity between matches as well? It would also shed some light on how balanced it is, if you have clan players with lower elo than IS players winning %53 of the time it's not as balanced as thought.

Clan/IS balance is a separate issue.

shad0w4life, on 02 April 2015 - 07:12 AM, said:

The planet losses would be more attributed to how the CW planet attacks are done and why they are putting a fix in for that.

And which is why I am wondering if people actually understood Russ' post.

[Phelan Ward-Kell]

Mystere, on 02 April 2015 - 07:20 AM, said:

And which is why I asked Phig my question.

This: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4333983 addresses those of you who seem lost.

Mystere, on 02 April 2015 - 07:20 AM, said:

Does it really matter? I consider light rushes a valid tactic.

It's not a debate about validity, it's a debate about IS using a tactic Clans cannot effectively match. 12 Firestarters with their uber-lag shield are difficult to stop even for an organised team.

Mystere, on 02 April 2015 - 07:20 AM, said:

Clan/IS balance is a separate issue.

Actually, lower ELO players beating higher ELO players really isn't a separate issue from balance when we're talking about IS vs Clan. Think on this one before I have to do any explaining, please.

Mystere, on 02 April 2015 - 07:20 AM, said:

And which is why I am wondering if people actually understood Russ' post.

Though I agree many have either not read, or not understood Russ' post, my previous posts are not about the planet losses, but in fact about the W/L ratio between Clans and IS.

[Mystere]

The Phigment, on 02 April 2015 - 06:19 AM, said:

I didn't state in any capacity that ghost drops were a problem, which reinforces my belief that people in this community either can't read, or can't understand plainly stated facts.
As for the broken mechanic in the system that Russ talked about, I did read that. If you had also read that, you would understand that what he was explaining only pertained to the TYPE of win (and in turn the reason for the disparity in planets trading sides), which DOES NOT pertain to why the number of wins were so near evenly distributed across the event

The core of my comments were directed at a few core groups of individuals.
1) The "Ghost drops are OP" group.
2) The "Clan mechs are OP" group.
3) The people who think that the IS' only advantage this weekend was superior numbers

See, this post is better than your original ...

The Phigment, on 02 April 2015 - 06:19 AM, said:

The point I was making, which apparently I made slightly too vague for those incapable of extricating their craniums from their rectums for 30 seconds, was the fact that IS fields a much more significant quantity of PUGs than Clans do and yet still fights to almost even wins with us should indicate a few things.

... except for this part.

The Phigment, on 02 April 2015 - 06:19 AM, said:

1) That such groups of PUGs can defeat Clan mechs indicates a disparity in mech balance (NOT in favor of Clans)
2) That IS really has little to complain about, except your own shortcomings
3) That the Clans need to stop bickering among each other (inter and intra-clan bickering), and unify their responses to IS activity.

Again, to the people posting ******* replies: For the love of the ever-expanding universe, PLEASE EDUCATE YOURSELVES!

Not all PUGs are created equal. And that is for both the Clans and IS.

[Mystere]

The Phigment, on 02 April 2015 - 07:30 AM, said:

This: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4333983 addresses those of you who seem lost.

See my comments to that post.

The Phigment, on 02 April 2015 - 07:30 AM, said:

It's not a debate about validity, it's a debate about IS using a tactic Clans cannot effectively match. 12 Firestarters with their uber-lag shield are difficult to stop even for an organised team.

Except that players, groups and PUGs alike, had already figured out how to do so just a few days after the release of CW. At least that was my experience on the Clan Jade Falcon front. But, I did hear IS players having more difficulty facing IS light rushes.

The Phigment, on 02 April 2015 - 07:30 AM, said:

Actually, lower ELO players beating higher ELO players really isn't a separate issue from balance when we're talking about IS vs Clan. Think on this one before I have to do any explaining, please.

No need for me to do so because you obviously missed what I meant.

The Phigment, on 02 April 2015 - 07:30 AM, said:

Though I agree many have either not read, or not understood Russ' post, my previous posts are not about the planet losses, but in fact about the W/L ratio between Clans and IS.

All I can say is that your second post was better than the first.

Edited by Mystere, 02 April 2015 - 08:00 AM.

[Darth Hotz]

Just because noone mentioned this so far:

As many players noticed a whole lot of the pug clanners were driving trial clan mechs to fill up their drop decks. Still clanners have won 53% of the games. So one can argue that even the stock clan mechs in the hands of beginners are powerfull enough to get the majority of wins. So i doubt that the rest of clan mechs are as bad as many claners claim they are. Some here are just so spoiled by the overpowered Stormcrow and Timberwolf that they cant drive a "normal" mech anymore and on the same hand seem to overestimate their so called "skill".

[Davers]

SaltBeef, on 01 April 2015 - 05:57 PM, said:

Explains why almost all Clan counter attack, defend missions ended in defeat against Overquirked IS mechs verses gimped , hitreg clammers. Talk about inside out assed backwards battletech representation.

Clans won a majority of their matches, despite a 120 ton IS advantage and 'overquirked' mechs. What are you even talking about?