127 replies to this topic

[Artgathan]

Q: How can one side win more games than the other and still lose the war?

A: Because not all wins are created equal. Only attacker wins (in invasion) and defender wins (in counter-attack) move the win % up and down.

[Davers]

Deathlike, on 02 April 2015 - 01:39 PM, said:

Unfortunately, last night, CW was far more barren than pre-event... most likely due to burnout or just PUGs finding out what CW is like.

It was pretty sad.

Those numbers are supposed to be "consistent" and not spiked because of the event. Some of us envisioned a CW like that, but that has never manifested itself past the initial deployment where everyone was trying to figure out the newness of CW. Unless more weekend CW events happen to see how this should play out (especially after fixing a terrible flaw in the system), CW isn't really going to get much better than that until more serious changes are made.

While I am patiently waiting for PGI to finish their vision for CW, I don't think CW will ever become as big (or fun) as many had thought.

1. Rewards are too low. I can probably do 4-5 regular matches in the time it takes to do one CW match.
2. Pug vs Premade. This alone will keep much of the game's population out of CW.
3. The game modes are pretty uninspired. There is no role warfare. The IS has no need for medium mechs, the Clans have no need for light mechs.

[Screech]

I just like the fact that PGI can now give out stats and numbers these days and the community accepts it at face value.

That is progress.

[Appogee]

Burktross, on 02 April 2015 - 02:28 PM, said:

You sure about that? We have an admission of guilt right here.

Ok, so Kuritans suspected there was a bug? (They couldn't know, because they don't have access to the code that creates the algorithm.) But if they did detect buggy behaviour, and they knew it would give them an unfair advantage, then I agree that would constitute them exploiting a broken mechanic.

I believe the vast majority of people who played IS last weekend - including myself - had no idea about any broken algorithm. That's why I took issue with the statements "IS cheated" and "IS exploited". Perhaps it is the case that Kurita cheated and/or exploited, based on ManaValkyrie's statement.

[Roadkill]

Seph MacLeod, on 02 April 2015 - 01:17 PM, said:

The history of the United States Marine Corps disagrees and would like a word with you.

As well as the battle of Thermopylae

and Brittan vs Hitlers war machine.

Two words for you: choke points.

I don't see any choke points in CW. There's no need to assault the hot gates, just go around and take some other world instead.

WWII was won due to numbers. Germany had superior equipment and training for most of the war. Russia stopped the German advance into the motherland due to winter... and sending hordes of troops into battle with a ration of 2 bullets each. Once the US entered the war the tide shifted. One Army War College study found that it took 5 Shermans to destroy 1 Panther, but concluded that this was okay because we had 8.

Sure you can find counter examples, but history vastly favors numbers over skill/technology.

[Stealth Fox]

Roadkill, on 02 April 2015 - 03:45 PM, said:

Two words for you: choke points.

I don't see any choke points in CW. There's no need to assault the hot gates, just go around and take some other world instead.

WWII was won due to numbers. Germany had superior equipment and training for most of the war. Russia stopped the German advance into the motherland due to winter... and sending hordes of troops into battle with a ration of 2 bullets each. Once the US entered the war the tide shifted. One Army War College study found that it took 5 Shermans to destroy 1 Panther, but concluded that this was okay because we had 8.

Sure you can find counter examples, but history vastly favors numbers over skill/technology.

yes, cause rushing into enemy held territory out manned totally let the Marines and Army use Choke Points against the enemy... being they where attacking..

Also I would like to point you to the out numbered p-47, F-U4, F-u6 and the P 38 against the much larger axis air fleets.

And a little war we like to simply call "Korea"

Edited by Seph MacLeod, 02 April 2015 - 04:04 PM.

[Roadkill]

By the time the Allies were on the offensive, we had numbers. Up until that point, Germany was winning and pressing forward. Even after the USA joined the war, it took 2 years for the Allies to build up sufficient numbers to begin to drive Germany back.

Numbers won the war, not skill or technology. The Allies won the war because the USA had an industrial base that was safe from attack and could out-produce all of the Axis powers combined.

[Mystere]

El Bandito, on 01 April 2015 - 10:29 PM, said:

First off, his own words.
http://mwomercs.com/...are-statistics/

Basically it means the last CW event should not be hold accountable for current balance between IS and Clans. The IS simply had the numbers to cheat the game mode system, turning it into an unfair advantage.

Then ban them all, I say.

Edited by Mystere, 02 April 2015 - 04:16 PM.

[mekabuser]

what i want to know is ,, HOw many of the battles on the star map can I participate in? Russ said at any given time 1500 plus were playing cw, but as a marik, i never saw more than say500, tops. which is more like 140 regular prime time East coast usa.

Second part,
If there are more battles going on than i can see as a marik, I would certainly LIKE to be able to participate without breaking contract, which mine is now somehow permanent btw.

Id like to fight for any given house v the clans if there is nothing going on marik style.

Last few nights havent even played cw because everything is bottled up with plus 20 defenders etc per planet contested.

were there really 1500 people playing cw at any given time?

[Roadkill]

Seph MacLeod, on 02 April 2015 - 03:55 PM, said:

Also I would like to point you to the out numbered p-47, F-U4, F-u6 and the P 38 against the much larger axis air fleets.

Aircraft production during WWII

USA: 300,000+
Russia: 150,000+
Britain: 130,000+
Germany: ~120,000
Japan: 75,000+

Tank production during WWII (same source):

USA: 60,900
Russia: 54,500
Britain: 23,200
Germany: 19,900
Italy: 4,600
Japan: 2,400

I'm sorry... you were saying?

[Mystere]

Artgathan, on 02 April 2015 - 02:33 PM, said:

Q: How can one side win more games than the other and still lose the war?

Why not ask the good 'ol US of A? They have experience in that.

...

Oh! I thought you said "battles". Please ignore me then.

[Davers]

mekabuser, on 02 April 2015 - 04:41 PM, said:

what i want to know is ,, HOw many of the battles on the star map can I participate in? Russ said at any given time 1500 plus were playing cw, but as a marik, i never saw more than say500, tops. which is more like 140 regular prime time East coast usa.

Second part,
If there are more battles going on than i can see as a marik, I would certainly LIKE to be able to participate without breaking contract, which mine is now somehow permanent btw.

Id like to fight for any given house v the clans if there is nothing going on marik style.

Last few nights havent even played cw because everything is bottled up with plus 20 defenders etc per planet contested.

were there really 1500 people playing cw at any given time?

The Clans lost 53 planets, and none of those battles were visible from Marik.

[Deathlike]

Davers, on 02 April 2015 - 02:36 PM, said:

While I am patiently waiting for PGI to finish their vision for CW, I don't think CW will ever become as big (or fun) as many had thought.

Welcome to reality.

Quote

1. Rewards are too low. I can probably do 4-5 regular matches in the time it takes to do one CW match.

TBH, it's been pretty lucrative for me. It's terrible when you're not good... so getting rewards becomes problematic (but, that's also been true in the non-CW queues).

Quote

2. Pug vs Premade. This alone will keep much of the game's population out of CW.

Personally, the "Looking for Group" feature should help with that, as PUGs need to be willingly guided by bigger groups (no commitment required outside of joining people directly on TS, and not with the in-game version).

Still, the commitment required outside of that (dropdeck primarily) is pretty large.

Quote

3. The game modes are pretty uninspired. There is no role warfare. The IS has no need for medium mechs, the Clans have no need for light mechs.

Counter-Attack is essentially Skirmish w/o turrets+gen doors but with an exposed MFB. Wow, what excitement!

Clans will get their light mechs eventually (Artic Cheetah), and I do run a medium in CW (there is role warfare, but it's all about killing+farming honestly). There are actual serviceable mediums in CW... it's just not as sexy as many of the Assaults, Heavies, and Lights, but they exist.

[0rionsbane]

53% overall minus the 2% auto win drops is still only 51% for a clan win precentage.
But then we the the explanation that the game modes are bugged, however we were just told in ALL game modes the clans are winning 51% of the time. with 2% less drops (ak the auto wins). So the explanation as to why we took the planets is still missing,
there are three sets of data we really need to even figure out why the inner sphere was winning so much. and I think if you were playing during the event you already know why and its not just the fact that we got more defense modes.
#1 We need the wins correlated their effect before the ceasefire. Most of the matches dont even effect the planet flipping only a small percentage do, We need data on what percentage of wins counted toward the planet flipping and im sure that will be predominately inner sphere.
#2 We need data on individual modes we heard one mode (defense is what im assuming though he didn't actually say) was glitched in favor of whoever had more players (is). but what was the win rate for those individual modes. and if defense is so advantageous (which currently it is to advantageous but needs special modifications to prevent a few exploits) it should really be looked at more and rebalanced anyway.
#3 We really really need data on the player count before the flip, i dont care how many are on for the whole event what matters is how many got on to defend those planets in the last hour before the ceasefire. if we had most of those 2% auto wins before the ceasefire we should by those same stats be winning planets which we did (we being is or more specifically frr.)

Either way with out more data we cant say these wins are in any way invalid, and with the current excuse of saying one mode was chosen to much for the inner sphere that is a game balance issue with that game mode, as well as the bug effecting its usage. to defend the territory we have to have gotten a win there. so we already went through an attack. that means that the clans were on average unable to break our defense. and we were able to defend to well as well as to often, but at 51% we would still be winning planets from them with either better focus or superior numbers before ceasefire.

[Stealth Fox]

Roadkill, on 02 April 2015 - 04:45 PM, said:

Aircraft production during WWII

USA: 300,000+
Russia: 150,000+
Britain: 130,000+
Germany: ~120,000
Japan: 75,000+

Tank production during WWII (same source):

USA: 60,900
Russia: 54,500
Britain: 23,200
Germany: 19,900
Italy: 4,600
Japan: 2,400

I'm sorry... you were saying?

you like to forget that most of our production was failures or going to allies because the US was not in the war yet was producing things FOR the war, It wasn't until we actually ..much later on in the war.. got GOOD aircraft, that we started to turn the tide, and even then, the number of Axis to Allies was in the Axis favor until our actual good planes started thinning the heard and kept thinning the numbers.

Until then.. the Japanese had Swarms of Zeros alone that devastated the Air space.

[Roadkill]

Seph MacLeod, on 02 April 2015 - 05:30 PM, said:

you like to forget that most of our production was failures or going to allies because the US was not in the war yet was producing things FOR the war

Incorrect assumption.

Quote

It wasn't until we actually ..much later on in the war.. got GOOD aircraft, that we started to turn the tide, and even then, the number of Axis to Allies was in the Axis favor until our actual good planes started thinning the heard and kept thinning the numbers.

Until then.. the Japanese had Swarms of Zeros alone that devastated the Air space.

The only truly competitive plane the Japanese had was the Zero, and even then it was primarily successful due to overwhelming numbers - as you yourself just admitted. Once our numbers began to match the Japanese numbers, our (eventual) superior technology could swing battles.

But that was only in the Pacific. The story in Europe was much different, where the Germans had superior technology until nearly the very end of the war but the Allies had a huge numbers advantage. Both in the air and on the ground.

Dude, even Britain out-produced the Germans. They lost because their superior technology was overwhelmed by superior numbers.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Artgathan, on 02 April 2015 - 02:33 PM, said:

Q: How can one side win more games than the other and still lose the war?

A: Because not all wins are created equal. Only attacker wins (in invasion) and defender wins (in counter-attack) move the win % up and down.

Pretty much like every war ever...

AMerican Civil war, South won almost every battle, lost
AMerican revolutionary war: British won like hell, lost
Germany, took over most of europe, and africa, had the best army, lost....

About every war ever, the side that won the most fights lost the war in the end....

Prolly cuz numbers mostly...for the Clans it was likely their stupid doctrines and "honor" system.....

[Stealth Fox]

Roadkill, on 02 April 2015 - 07:05 PM, said:

Incorrect assumption.


The only truly competitive plane the Japanese had was the Zero, and even then it was primarily successful due to overwhelming numbers - as you yourself just admitted. Once our numbers began to match the Japanese numbers, our (eventual) superior technology could swing battles.

But that was only in the Pacific. The story in Europe was much different, where the Germans had superior technology until nearly the very end of the war but the Allies had a huge numbers advantage. Both in the air and on the ground.

Dude, even Britain out-produced the Germans. They lost because their superior technology was overwhelmed by superior numbers.

Better tech, Quality over Quality and pilots that had survived several encounters with the Zeros was what won, Not Zerg Tactics in the Pacific, norwas it Zerg Tactics or overwhelming force that the Marines or Army used in the Islands as well. It was the Quality of the troops, the Quality of their gear and their tenacity that won, NOT body count.

Even when we DID get good airplanes up into the air.. they where in small amounts. The Two highest scoring aces of the War with 35 plus kills and the second in the 20s proved what happens when you have quality over numbers

Oh.. and in Korea.. American and South Korean where badly out numbered.. And yet you have the story of the Marines pushing back over whelming odds, and even storming so far in to enemy territory they where knocking on China's door. They where told to pull back or they'd of kept going.

China.. just like they do today.. had massive amounts of troops back then..and they still got their asses kicked by a fairly modest compliment of Marines and Army.

This includes air battles between larger groups of JETS against the last Prop Plane to enter WW2, and But even THEN the superior training, skills and tactics of the Marines and Navy in those "out dated planes" held the line and pushed it back even.

See..I dun know where you are getting your information.. but it is a proven fact that the US tends to favor Quality over Numbers. The lessons learned from ww1 and ww2 let them know that Numbers and Swarms where an expensive and losing game. Quality of training, equipment, tactics, training and making sure the best things are used is what it has been doing sense before Korea, and guess what.. it fricken works.

[CHH Badkarma]

Davers, on 02 April 2015 - 11:50 AM, said:

There were more people playing CW at any given time then some people claimed play the game period. I think those were pretty good numbers.

Those numbers are good? For an event? One that supposedly drew in a lot of players?

Yeah, no. Then again, maybe my hopes are to high.

Edited by CHH Badkarma, 02 April 2015 - 11:36 PM.

[Stealth Fox]

CHH Badkarma, on 02 April 2015 - 11:35 PM, said:

Those numbers are good? For an event? One that supposedly drew in a lot of players?

Yeah, no. Then again, maybe my hopes are to high.

Would of been a lot better if PGI had not driven off most of the hard core BT fans at the start.