71 replies to this topic

[PhoenixFire55]

Elizander, on 25 June 2015 - 10:02 PM, said:

Grid Iron owners should brace themselves. The end is near.

lol ... Dream on. P2W mechs nerfed? Nope.

(I use term P2W loosely, they still suck but at least they suck less than their c-bill counterparts)

[EvilCow]

Redoing balance basing it on a set of well defined rules can only be a good thing. I really was waiting for this.

[TyphonCh]

PhoenixFire55, on 26 June 2015 - 01:36 AM, said:

I'm not sure what's worse, three grammatical mistakes in one post or a native english grammar {Godwin's Law} bigot who derails a perfectly valid discussion.

Wow. That was a bit uncalled for. Sure I trolled a litfle bit because I thought it was funny. No different than the people with a library of memes that purposely degrade and humiliate, which I've seen dozens of times on this forum alone.
I gave the OP a like because I actually did finish reading it and liked what he he was getting at. Put your badge away and give it a rest.
Out.

[Navy Sixes]

XX Sulla XX, on 25 June 2015 - 09:41 PM, said:

This will be based on an internal system where they look at things like hard point location, number of hard points, agility, etc etc.
Does any one have any thoughts?

Scale is a tremendous balancing factor in any shooter. As any good light pilot will tell you, being smaller means being harder to hit, which is almost if not more valuable than being able to carry more armor. Since PGI seems unable or unwilling to reconsider the crippling size of many mechs (specifically mediums) I at least hope they will consider scale among the "etc." they factor into their new BV system.

[Bishop Steiner]

Shadow Magnet, on 25 June 2015 - 09:51 PM, said:

So we will have new top meta mechs soon? It's all good, I like changes, makes the game more interesting.

I pitty those who sold mechs after mastering the chassis. I bet some people will regret that when the new balance goes online.

Gotta say, I have never sold mechs based off Quirks or Meta.

How it drives, Hitboxes (and twistedness in general) and Hardpoints are what I decide by. If I don't like those 3, then I'm not going to like driving it regardless of Meta or Quirks.

For the MinMax Smurfy Warriors who do? Don't feel the least bit bad for them.

Elizander, on 25 June 2015 - 10:02 PM, said:

Quirks were a test to begin with.

Grid Iron owners should brace themselves. The end is near.

One can only hope. More worried about the rest of the HBKs and CN9s which were amongst the only really well thought out quirked mechs to begin with. Probably because only one of the variants allowed for boating to begin with.

Rick Sanchez 1895, on 26 June 2015 - 12:52 AM, said:

This. Really bad Idea.

Leave MM alone if you can't put Players with equal skill together.

If MWO could figure out the formula for putting equal skill together? Be a lot of Tryhards with their little worlds being shattered.

[Mudhutwarrior]

Sounds great to me. Those elo changes will push the artificially good exploit pilots into a place they will have to learn and let them be exposed to top tier players who will clearly see what they are up to.

Looking forward to it. I will buy another package if it bears fruit.

[Duke Nedo]

Intrigued!

[TWIAFU]

XX Sulla XX, on 25 June 2015 - 09:41 PM, said:

They are also redoing/replacing Elo depending on how you want to say it. It will not longer be based on just winning or loosing but in your performance. If you loose but do top damage you will not loose points but might gain them. If you win but do nothing you might not gain any points.

This makes me happy. People will now learn, the hard way, that damage has never been the measure of ability.

Non teamwork players are going to suffer, hard, and it is good.

You do not perform well with your team, you will be put with others that do the same, and all 12 of them can see who can out Rambo the others. These games will be avoided like the black death.

I look forward to when these sh*t players are stuck with each other and start to complain about it.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

honestly the balance mentioned from russ is so HUGE, that it will debalance the game horribly, at the first side, you will see.

Edited by Titannium, 26 June 2015 - 03:37 AM.

[EvilCow]

Titannium, on 26 June 2015 - 03:36 AM, said:

honestly the balance mentioned from russ is so HUGE, that it will debalance the game horribly, at the first side, you will see.

It is possible that it would create temporary problems but, in general, I prefer a long term sustainable balance strategy instead of the bandaids approach we enjoyed until now.

We can just wait and see.

[JudgeDeathCZ]

FupDup, on 25 June 2015 - 09:52 PM, said:

Big Things In July™ all over again?

We'll see, my hand actuators are crossed.

Logged to like this and QFT

[Love in an Annihilator]

TWIAFU, on 26 June 2015 - 03:09 AM, said:

This makes me happy. People will now learn, the hard way, that damage has never been the measure of ability.

Non teamwork players are going to suffer, hard, and it is good.

You do not perform well with your team, you will be put with others that do the same, and all 12 of them can see who can out Rambo the others. These games will be avoided like the black death.

I look forward to when these sh*t players are stuck with each other and start to complain about it.

No, that's not how it's going to work at all: if you're the only one shooting in the right direction while your mates are shooting trees or going to cap alone in an Assault you'll have to play with even bigger noobs (or newbs) in the next game because you had the highest score in that stomp.

Edited by Rick Sanchez 1895, 26 June 2015 - 03:54 AM.

[XX Sulla XX]

Rick Sanchez 1895, on 26 June 2015 - 03:53 AM, said:

No, that's not how it's going to work at all: if you're the only one shooting in the right direction while your mates are shooting trees or going to cap alone in an Assault you'll have to play with even bigger noobs (or newbs) in the next game because you had the highest score in that stomp.

No performing better will make your Elo go up so you will play with better and better players. What it is doing is making it so you can move your Elo without having to carry the entire team to a win every time.

[Love in an Annihilator]

XX Sulla XX, on 26 June 2015 - 04:01 AM, said:

No performing better will make your Elo go up so you will play with better and better players. What it is doing is making it so you can move your Elo without having to carry the entire team to a win every time.

It would be fine - ideal even - when a better elo would put you in games with other high elo players - but that's certainly not the way it is now and unless i missed something(?) it's not going to change.

What would be great is a system with 5 or 6 tiers in wich players from the same tier play each other. Right now players with high elo play with absolute beginners and i don't think that's fun for anyone.

[Bobzilla]

XX Sulla XX, on 26 June 2015 - 04:01 AM, said:

No performing better will make your Elo go up so you will play with better and better players. What it is doing is making it so you can move your Elo without having to carry the entire team to a win every time.

Your ELO has no effect on the other teams individual ELOs, just the higher yours is chances are someone's on your team is lower.

I think this is the problem with the current system, its team A's averge vs team B's average. They should make it player vs player matching, not one 2000 and one 1000 vs two 1500s.

[TexAce]

Rick Sanchez 1895, on 26 June 2015 - 04:08 AM, said:

It would be fine - ideal even - when a better elo would put you in games with other high elo players - but that's certainly not the way it is now and unless i missed something(?) it's not going to change.

What would be great is a system with 5 or 6 tiers in wich players from the same tier play each other. Right now players with high elo play with absolute beginners and i don't think that's fun for anyone.

My hopes are that they will adress exactly this. MM matched people by calculating an average ELO per team, which was also a stupid decision to do if you ask me.

[oldradagast]

Wait, wait wait... they are going to look at hardpoint number, location, and mech mobility? I never buy mechs for quirks, but hardpoint number and location has basically remained unchanged since the game left Closed Beta. This could be a trainwreck if handled incorrectly.

Look, if my mechs turn into something totally different based on whatever the latest "great idea of the month" is, I'm not going to be happy. Yes, yes - buy the next mech pack to get mechs with all those extra hardpoints and mobility that the old ones now lack! Until they get nerfed... And is this now going to be a rolling thing once we have dynamic geometry on everything? Hardpoint numbers and locations floating around in a sad attempt to keep people off balance and funneling away stupid amounts of money into the "great mech of the month?"

Seriously, if they want to tweak a few mechs by adding in badly needed hard points (Pretty Baby, for example), or try to give all mechs a few high-mounted hardpoints, fine. But if I log in one day to find that my Hunchbacks suddenly have lousy torso twist or half the missile launchers on my Awesomes are gone because "balance," I'm going to be ticked.

I wish I had faith that this was going to make sense, but past experience is not supporting that idea. I bought the mechs I like for a reason; get rid of that reason, and not only will I not play them anymore, I won't buy ANY mechs anymore since what I purchase could change radically from month to month. Given the long, miserable process of buying, grinding, and equipping the 3 needed chassis, it will simply no longer be cost effective to play the game if, by the time you're done, your mech will have changed into something else.

Edited by oldradagast, 26 June 2015 - 06:22 AM.

[Mystere]

PhoenixFire55, on 26 June 2015 - 12:25 AM, said:

Ooooook ... so what they kept telling us about the current MM, like that Elo was a proper representation of player skill was what? Lies?

Nope. The change was triggered by loud cries.

I also predict the crying will never end even after the changes. Why? Because accepting personal responsibility has never been a thing for most of this game's player base.

Edited by Mystere, 26 June 2015 - 06:52 AM.

[Koniks]

I like the idea of rebalancing. I like the idea of getting at least 1 or 2 public tests before implementation. I dislike their "if the community doesn't like it, we'll abandon it." I don't think they currently have a good means of figuring that out which is at least partly our fault. I'm also skeptical about them putting together a solid process for evaluating what needs to be changed and what the change needs to be.

Elo buckets is a great idea. Maybe it'll work after Steam release. Maybe it'll probably be an improvement over the status quo for players below the mean Elo and maybe 1 standard deviation above it. It's probably not going to change the experience for players with an Elo 2 or 3 standard deviations above the mean.

[Lugh]

Mystere, on 26 June 2015 - 06:37 AM, said:

Nope. The change was triggered by loud cries.

I also predict the crying will never end even after the changes. Why? Because accepting personal responsibility has never been a thing for most of this game's player base.

It's always been a big thing for me.
*whispers* maybe I'm more alone than I thought