407 replies to this topic

[Slambot]

Oh and IS did not "roll over" the clans in the first CW event. The clans still won more than they lost. About the same as at Tukayyid.

[Eider]

Slambot, on 11 May 2015 - 07:51 PM, said:

Clans won about 53% of the battles. The math was easy. Just compare the number of IS victories to clan victories. Every faction got a point for every victory. To me, the most compelling stat was that IS did more damage yet killed fewer mechs. This says that the biggest factor in survivability is the clan XL.

Considering top 3 were crows its more than xl, its the broken hitboxes.

[Telmasa]

Frost Lord, on 11 May 2015 - 07:48 PM, said:

well there were no ghost drops so that would suggest they won the most games tho that would likely be because our 12 man groups spent 30-60 minutes waiting for a game.

This right here is what I'm talking about when it comes to population disparity - the amount of "new" or "casual" IS players outnumbered that who were playing for the clans by a completely staggering amount, which is why you saw qeues of 30+ IS teams at any given time waiting for a fight.

That's why the IS didn't just outright sweep the event. Without that population disparity (and without -MS- being -MS-), the IS would have had a LANDSLIDE win.

[Threat Doc]

Y'know, I've said my peace, here... Battle Value would solve so many problems that none of you are willing to acknowledge could be done, but you're so scared of changing anything, or trying anything new, that you just dismiss it out of hand. You say Battle Value is an overly complicated system, but you can't tell me why tonnage is better, more even, and then you ***** and complain that everything's out of whack. That's fine, stick with the stupidity, and good luck.

[Jess Hazen]

Adamski, on 11 May 2015 - 05:23 PM, said:

What is it you think I lost? I know vague statements makes you seem deep to your little sister, but it dont mean squat to me.

I believe that teamwork is always the deciding factor in a team game, and that the clans had better composed teams. Better composed teams being a general statement meaning that a higher percentage of the teams playing were in fact premade and organized teams. Even when its a pug group there are a lot of people who care and do their best to organize the company.

The clans managed, albeit just barely, to scrape together the minimum number of teams to hold the 63 zones against the IS zerg war of attrition when it mattered. Also on every occasion when it mattered [you know the last few hours of the event] rushing the base and taking the win and claiming the zone for clan.

It was taking about 4 minutes to get a win not including loading time for my group when we were lucky enough to get an attack.

TLDR; Organized clan teams had no wait time and therefore shattered through Tukayyid defenses.

[Livewyr]

Clans are getting pushed back... because many of us (myself included) just don't give a damn at the moment.

As of my disposition right now, I probably won't play more than 1-2 matches a week until July when my Shadowcat comes out... and even then, unless there is some drastic change (incentive to play CW) I'll probably only be around for a couple weeks.


There just isn't any reason to do it; getting your name on a planet is 98% dependent on having more players in your group than the next clan, with minimal consideration of skill gap.
Too many other games out there with some sense of personal or unit Advancement; here... not so much.

250-> 240 ...whatever, didn't notice the difference anyways.

[Jess Hazen]

Kay Wolf, on 11 May 2015 - 08:06 PM, said:

Y'know, I've said my peace, here... Battle Value would solve so many problems that none of you are willing to acknowledge could be done, but you're so scared of changing anything, or trying anything new, that you just dismiss it out of hand. You say Battle Value is an overly complicated system, but you can't tell me why tonnage is better, more even, and then you ***** and complain that everything's out of whack. That's fine, stick with the stupidity, and good luck.

I think they should give BV a shot. That would involve a whole-hearted commitment to it, removal of quirks[lets say some durability quirks are acceptable], actual true weapon stats, and the normalizing of grey areas around weapons[laser duration, removal of ghost heat, ect].

[Adamski]

Telmasa, on 11 May 2015 - 07:51 PM, said:

Assumptions? Here is proof perfect that you have no idea what you are talking about:


You're quoting numbers that are completely out of context and represent a wholly different set of statistics than what you are claiming. That event win rate has almost nothing to do with actual performance, and everything to do with population disparity; in fact there's plenty statistics to suggest that throughout the Tukkayid event, the IS consistently outperformed the Clans per each match.

The reason the Clans won at all was because of population disparity, plain and simple. And we already all know about -MS- and what they've been up to.

"don't brawl", are you serious? The Thunderbolt-5SS has DOUBLE RANGE on MPLs so that they are effectively Large Lasers *PLUS* heat reduction *PLUS cooldown; the 9SE (which I use to troll pug matches) fires 3 LPL like they're medium lasers (while simultaneously doing double-gauss damage) at LL max range; the Thunderbolt also manages to have a compact hitbox with god-mode hardpoints combined with mobility that allows it to advance with almost complete impunity, where as the Timberwolve's ears will pop off with a mere 2 alphas from any of your precious IS superquirk laser boats.

The superquirked IS mechs stomp all over any competition in the game, especially other non-quirked IS mechs. The Grid Iron with a single Gauss Rifle has more DPS than a double-gauss Jagermech or King Crab.

It's a complete joke, nothing but a gimimckry B.S. contest; and you try to justify it with a fake boogeyman ghost story about the Timberwolf and Stormcrow.

The only justified complaints about the Stormcrow are that its hitboxes need the Jenner treatment & that Streak-6s need range reduced to 270, plus a possible ghost heat scale increase. Everything else is totally ignorant hogwash.


To all the other IS players instantly jumping on the cry bandwagon here: You Don't Know What You Are Talking About.

You haven't played Clan Mechs. You haven't experienced how one-sided the Stalker/Thunderbolt deathball is without having your own Stalker/Thunderbolt deathball to counter it.

I've been on both sides of this, and the favor is overwhelmingly on the side of the IS superquirked mechs.


As I stated before: the problem here is the quirks. Fix the quirks, provide nerfs to Streak-6 boating, let the tonnage be the same for both sides, and work out the balance from there.

You trollin right? The TDR has a compact model / hitbox? They gave it ST structure quirks because its so fat and juicy.

The 5SS has an optimal of 353m with quirks and modules, which is less than a IS LL (450) base range. I'm not going to bother refuting anything else you have to say regarding mech or equipment balance since its obvious you have no F'ing clue what you are talking about.

Yes, the 60% / 53% clan win rate does not represent everything, but it does represent the in match balance when done over a large enough sample of matches. (Tukayyid being an especially good example because you can drill down and see the different premade 12 man win%).

What the win rate does not represent, is population imbalance / territory gained, which is IRRELEVANT when discussing faction/mech balance.

[CHH Badkarma]

Wanderingpaws, on 11 May 2015 - 02:35 PM, said:

I'm a Clanner myself but even I think this is insane...

Cant tell if alt account and just trolling or just very naive

[Tanis McGavern]

Telmasa, on 11 May 2015 - 07:04 PM, said:

Band-aid for the real problem....

The tonnage wasn't the issue, the superquirks WERE.

If you reduced the super-quirked IS mechs to a reasonable norm (and brought other underquirked mechs up to that norm), while keeping that tonnage limit difference, I really think most players could have been happy with that.

You want IS mechs to behave like they did in BT canon? Why don't clanners start by behaving like clanners did in BT canon and stop focus firing/spawn camping/using arty and start demanding to drop in stars rather than companies. Never been more frustrated than getting demolished by clan lights swarming a drop zone shooting and dropping arty on anything in front of them. This won't happen, of course, but don't complain of disparity on one side and ignore it on the other.

[Domenoth]

Kay Wolf, on 11 May 2015 - 08:06 PM, said:

Y'know, I've said my peace, here... Battle Value would solve so many problems that none of you are willing to acknowledge could be done, but you're so scared of changing anything, or trying anything new, that you just dismiss it out of hand. You say Battle Value is an overly complicated system, but you can't tell me why tonnage is better, more even, and then you ***** and complain that everything's out of whack. That's fine, stick with the stupidity, and good luck.

I think the only way you could do it would be to assign each weapon a value dependent on what Mech it's installed in. By that I mean a large laser has X points on a Thunderbolt and Y points on a Locust. Add up all the point values for all the weapons in your build, and that's your value. You have to do it this way so that if you take a really crappy build on a Thunderbolt, you aren't penalized for the Thunderbolt itself.

If you don't do it that way, all the "You brought <Mech Name> to CW? You can't bring <Mech Name> to CW..." will just turn into "You brought <Weapon Type> on a <Mech Name> to CW? You can't bring <Weapon Type> on a <Mech Name> to CW..." and that's not really an improvement at all.

Having said that, how many Weapon and Mech combinations are possible right now? Pretty sure that's a gigantic number that would require way too many games' worth of data to establish an accurate baseline.

[ConquerorClass]

Adamski, on 11 May 2015 - 07:06 PM, said:

There are no super-quirked mechs, just mechs that have been quirked to the Clans level.

Clan are OP, their movement, XL engines, perpertual laser vomit, so blatantly tiring.

but the quirks are a quick jab to a clanners face if they aint prepared...

the jaeger A... twin gauss, 9 tons ammo.
module.

gets 2564m+-..?! max range.
856m effective... 1700m droppoff....
hitting pin point.

support your group and stll get 600-800 per jaeger.

top that clanner, but get in close, and youll mop the floor..

Jaeger A is OP.

[Lunatic_Asylum]

IS are actually much stronger than Clans. Pinpoint damage is too insane. I welcome the change as an IS player!

[Suzumiya Haruhi no Kerensky]

was really tire of bringing mechs that doesnt get one shot by streakboat, arigato pgi

[Helaton]

I would guess from the statistics that followed Tukayyid, they might have stats that support the change. Then again they might not.

Perhaps they use the Mercs that switched to measure balance. Same pilots in different mechs, are they doing more damage/kills/etc in IS or Clan mechs? They doing 2800 in Clan and 3200 in IS?

Who knows. If it was as simple as encouraging population like in the past, they would probably just do the CBill/GXP modifiers. Kurita would be at 50%, CSJ & CGB would be at 200% bonuses.

[PraetorGix]

Well done. PUG vs Team is the real imbalancing factor here, along with populations in each faction. That stupid ton advantage for these crying IS babies was out of place from the start and is well gone now.

[Kyynele]

WTF is this I don't even

There is no real reason to defend or conquer planets. Most people playing CW just want their loyalty points to get ranks and the stuff that comes with them.

Give a damn reason to care about what happens on the map, THEN start balancing the game mode IS vs Clan based on what's happening on the map.

edit: my IS drop deck is already 240 tons, so this doesn't affect me in any way. Also, my unit's home faction is CGB. The reasoning to this is just stupid, I'm not crying about losing my crutch.

Edited by Kyynele, 11 May 2015 - 09:27 PM.

[Surn]

"this is madness!"
this ....is... CW. (front kick)

[PraetorGix]

Domenoth, on 11 May 2015 - 08:37 PM, said:

I think the only way you could do it would be to assign each weapon a value dependent on what Mech it's installed in. By that I mean a large laser has X points on a Thunderbolt and Y points on a Locust. Add up all the point values for all the weapons in your build, and that's your value. You have to do it this way so that if you take a really crappy build on a Thunderbolt, you aren't penalized for the Thunderbolt itself.

If you don't do it that way, all the "You brought <Mech Name> to CW? You can't bring <Mech Name> to CW..." will just turn into "You brought <Weapon Type> on a <Mech Name> to CW? You can't bring <Weapon Type> on a <Mech Name> to CW..." and that's not really an improvement at all.

Having said that, how many Weapon and Mech combinations are possible right now? Pretty sure that's a gigantic number that would require way too many games' worth of data to establish an accurate baseline.

Ohh, but didn't you know? here everyone is a game developer, what do PGI know after all? A neckbeard is all the qualification you need in the magical forumland.

[ConquerorClass]

Domenoth, on 11 May 2015 - 08:37 PM, said:

I think the only way you could do it would be to assign each weapon a value dependent on what Mech it's installed in. By that I mean a large laser has X points on a Thunderbolt and Y points on a Locust. Add up all the point values for all the weapons in your build, and that's your value. You have to do it this way so that if you take a really crappy build on a Thunderbolt, you aren't penalized for the Thunderbolt itself.

If you don't do it that way, all the "You brought <Mech Name> to CW? You can't bring <Mech Name> to CW..." will just turn into "You brought <Weapon Type> on a <Mech Name> to CW? You can't bring <Weapon Type> on a <Mech Name> to CW..." and that's not really an improvement at all.

Having said that, how many Weapon and Mech combinations are possible right now? Pretty sure that's a gigantic number that would require way too many games' worth of data to establish an accurate baseline.

I get Kay's point.....

a THUNDERBOLT has awesome high points.... ERLL or ERPPC, is uber.... get a catapult C1? with 4 ERLL on its nose.... NOT THE SAME BRAND OF PEW PEW.....

so straight up a thunder is 65 points.... a catapult is 40ish.... catapult is in the line with poor vindicator.

this BV is great idea... simplified maybe and a little work, it'd be a good indicator of "optimised - Meta" and "garbage"

like a thunderbolt 5s...?!
3 med
LL
lrm 15
srm 2...

JUST as bad as a vindicator as well.