767 replies to this topic

[Jman5]

You know, these polls always solidify after just a few days and then there are very few additional voters. You really don't need to make these polls last even a week to get 99% of the people who are going to vote.

Edited by Jman5, 27 August 2015 - 05:49 PM.

[IraqiWalker]

Jman5, on 27 August 2015 - 05:29 PM, said:

You know, these polls always solidify after just a few days and then there are very few additional voters. You really don't need to make these polls last even week to get 99% of the people who are going to vote.

We've had cases where people completely missed out on polls before. I know a LOT of people who didn't even know there were polls on which mechs to include in the resistance packages.

[Jman5]

IraqiWalker, on 27 August 2015 - 05:45 PM, said:

We've had cases where people completely missed out on polls before. I know a LOT of people who didn't even know there were polls on which mechs to include in the resistance packages.

And you could leave the poll open for a year and people would still miss out on it. The point is the vast majority of people who will vote, vote in the first 2 or 3 days. There are never enough additional voters in the following days to move the numbers much at all. The percentages have been steady since day 1 and leaving it open for two weeks just delays things.

[slide]

These sorts of polls should be a part of the patcher or UI in games so they get maximum exposure to people who actually play. There is a seriously small percentage of players who even visit the forums.

[IraqiWalker]

slide, on 27 August 2015 - 11:10 PM, said:

These sorts of polls should be a part of the patcher or UI in games so they get maximum exposure to people who actually play. There is a seriously small percentage of players who even visit the forums.

By my estimates, it's about 25% of the player population that frequents the forums. Just by looking at the votes here.

Which is fine. Players that don't engage in the forums, usually don't want to voice an opinion, if they wanted to be involved, they would have done so already.

[Willard Phule]

Here's the part that everyone seems to have failed to recognize.

PGI has no plans to ever come up with a tutorial that actually teaches anyone to do anything. Instead, they set up the Matchmaker/Elo system in such a fashion that new players would be seeded with experienced players...therefore forcing the community to be unpaid trainers.

This new PSR system, at least in the last few days, is actually worse about putting teams together than the old system was. Once upon a time, there was rhyme and reason to the imbalance...some Group player brought his inflated Elo and got saddled with noobs to even him out. Now...you just get 80% new players because that's the way it is.

Don't expect this thing to work the way you think it will, or how PGI says it will. They're not known for being upfront about how matches are put together or for making things work correctly.

[Davers]

IraqiWalker, on 26 August 2015 - 05:08 PM, said:

You wrote a lot! Let me address just a few things, in no particular order.

1. Hunchback and Stormcrow are both medium mechs, and they fill similar roles.(3 out of the 5 Hunchbacks are energy and missiles after all). You seem to think the Stormcrow is the better mech (don't buy this or you will be 'too good too fast') but recommend the player buy the Hunchback. Why would you recommend a new player, with all that entails (limited funds, limited mechbays, etc) a 'training mech'? Even if someone insisted on buying an IS mech, I do not think I would recommend the Hunchback. Maybe an Enforcer?

2. LRMs. The tier 5 player's assessment of LRMs may be 100% accurate, but that is because they haven't learned positioning. The weapon is NOT OP, just the player (and his team) lacks the knowledge to defend against them. So the player's opinion of them is wrong and once he improves he will realize this.

3. I wish you could show me a single example where a good thread/post about balance/game mechanics was knocked purely based on player skill.

Edited by Davers, 28 August 2015 - 12:25 AM.

[LennStar]

IraqiWalker, on 27 August 2015 - 11:38 PM, said:

By my estimates, it's about 25% of the player population that frequents the forums. Just by looking at the votes here.

Which is fine. Players that don't engage in the forums, usually don't want to voice an opinion, if they wanted to be involved, they would have done so already.

Or perhaps they just dont have 2+ hours a day to sieve through the hundreds of posts if there is something interesting.

[IraqiWalker]

Willard Phule, on 28 August 2015 - 12:23 AM, said:

Here's the part that everyone seems to have failed to recognize.

PGI has no plans to ever come up with a tutorial that actually teaches anyone to do anything. Instead, they set up the Matchmaker/Elo system in such a fashion that new players would be seeded with experienced players...therefore forcing the community to be unpaid trainers.

This new PSR system, at least in the last few days, is actually worse about putting teams together than the old system was. Once upon a time, there was rhyme and reason to the imbalance...some Group player brought his inflated Elo and got saddled with noobs to even him out. Now...you just get 80% new players because that's the way it is.

Don't expect this thing to work the way you think it will, or how PGI says it will. They're not known for being upfront about how matches are put together or for making things work correctly.

You haven't checked the test server then, have you. The new Tutorial is nothing short of excellent. Check it out. It's already out on the test server, I don't know for how long.

Davers, on 28 August 2015 - 12:24 AM, said:

You wrote a lot! Let me address just a few things, in no particular order.

1. Hunchback and Stormcrow are both medium mechs, and they fill similar roles.(3 out of the 5 Hunchbacks are energy and missiles after all). You seem to think the Stormcrow is the better mech (don't buy this or you will be 'too good too fast') but recommend the player buy the Hunchback. Why would you recommend a new player, with all that entails (limited funds, limited mechbays, etc) a 'training mech'? Even if someone insisted on buying an IS mech, I do not think I would recommend the Hunchback. Maybe an Enforcer?

Why the enforcer, if I may ask? For me, here are the exact reasons why I recommend the hunchback:

1- If you start with the 4SP, you learn to use missiles, and lasers, while learning to maneuver

2- Every single hunchback variant is extremely nimble and agile. It's one of very few mechs that can shoot almost directly behind it.

3- The mech is small sized, making it easier for the new pilot to dodge incoming fire at range.

4- By the time the pilot has enough funds to buy the second variant, they've already learned how to work with terrain, and how to use it, maybe not at a top notch level, but they've learned it.

5- If they started out with the SP, then they will not transition to a hunched model, which will teach them early on, how to torso twist, and help them with more advanced piloting skill (Something a pilot will rarely learn with any other mech, short of the centurion, or the WVR/GRF)

6- By the time they are done with 3 variants, the pilot will have learned how to use terrain, how to work with bigger mechs, and not try to be the main cannon on the front, learned heat management, learned how to corner shoot, and learned how to torso twist.

7- Once done with the Hunchback, they can jump into any other mech, and have little trouble with it. In fact, a good transition after that, is any JJ mech, so they can learn to best use those.

8- If they have any interest in CW, the hunchback is a solid addition to any drop deck. Maybe not the best medium for an IS deck, but it's definitely not tier 4, or 5.

Basically, I see the SCR as too much of a crutch. It gives a lot, and requires very little from the pilot. The hunchback is neither being tossed into the deep end, nor the big assist of the SCR, it sits comfortably in a good spot where the pilot will neither suffer, nor be lax because of the mech's features.

Bear in mind, this is all under the caveat of them not having a mech they have found a liking to, already. If they found something they like, that's my number 1 recommendation.

Davers, on 28 August 2015 - 12:24 AM, said:

2. LRMs. The tier 5 player's assessment of LRMs may be 100% accurate, but that is because they haven't learned positioning. The weapon is NOT OP, just the player (and his team) lacks the knowledge to defend against them. So the player's opinion of them is wrong and once he improves he will realize this.

That's the problem though. Tier 5 players can't handle LRMs as they are, if we want to buff them so they are decent in top tier play, they decimate lower tier games into ash. So any balance discussion, should also take into account, the impact on these players.

What I said was that both opinions were correct. For a tier 5 player, LRMs are OP, for a tier 1 player, LRMs are trash. Neither one is wrong here. So while complaining about LRMs immediately tells us that the player is in the lower tiers, their cries should not go ignored, just because they are low tier. They won't have a chance to get good, if they leave because of the explosive shower, and not learning how to deal with it. Top that with everyone calling them a noob for dying to a weapon system they don't know how to counter.



For me, LRMs are not a problem, unless it's caustic valley, I'm in my direwolf, and I am abandoned by my team, with no ECM. That's pretty much the only situation where LRMs are close to being a threat to me.

Davers, on 28 August 2015 - 12:24 AM, said:

3. I wish you could show me a single example where a good thread/post about balance/game mechanics was knocked purely based on player skill.

Literally any one that involved discussion about the Arctic Cheetah, the Timberwolf back in the day, and the Direwolf with wave 1, and what followed. Pick any IS vs. Clan thread that dealt with balance, and see the many posts that just bash any suggestion, or statement with "L2P IS/Clan noobs"

LennStar, on 28 August 2015 - 02:25 AM, said:

Or perhaps they just dont have 2+ hours a day to sieve through the hundreds of posts if there is something interesting.

You don't need to sieve through posts to make one. If you have an opinion on something, or have a question, you can very easily start a thread, and see what happens.

When I first jumped into Warthunder, I headed to the forums, asking people about how to pilot the LaGG, because I sucked in that thing. It took me all of 1 minute.

Same here.

[TWIAFU]

Arriok, on 20 August 2015 - 08:51 AM, said:

I have a question. If Tier 1 groups with a Tier 5 will they ever get a match?

Yes.

[ThatGuy539]

valt901, on 20 August 2015 - 06:48 AM, said:

If you publicly display tiers noobs and those of lower rank will be hunted down for quick easy kills thus driving even more players out of MWO. If you want to see your own skill level and use it for an improvement yardstick tha's fine, but no one else needs to see it. We have enough penis measuring going on in this game already.

If the match maker is working properly, higher tier players shouldn't be seeing noobs. So if you see noobs in a game, chances are that you are in and around that same tier level too. aka Noob on noob action.

However, group play is different. Mixed tier groups will lead to high and low tiers in the same game.

EG.
I was shooting the crap out of an Atlas last night in my Panther...in a group game. The poor guy could barely shoot back and just stood there and took it. I was practically standing still...in a light, facing an Atlas.. I felt bad for him or her. With the event going on and the fact that they were right in the middle of it, they didn't have much of a chance.

It didn't need a big sign over it's head saying Noob. Just doing what it was, was enough indication of the noob status. The tier status wouldn't have made much of a difference. Less experienced players are likely to get trashed by higher tiers anyway....it's a fighting game. If you are on the field, you are a target. Hence the need for the matchmaker to keep things evenly matched.

I hope that person didn't get too discouraged.

Actually showing the tier level could help with making groups. Right now if someone throws together a group of PUGs they can get a real mixed bag of unknown skills. As with that obviously new Atlas player being dropped into a game of high tier players. They obviously paired up with some high tier people. They would have had a much better time of it if they grouped up with a bunch of other players of the same skill level.

[ThatGuy539]

So it looks like it's Opt-In.

Will we see this implemented in a patch on Sept 8th?

At this point I'm kinda getting itchy to see what tier I'm in. And what tier the dudes I've been hanging with are in...assuming they opt to show that.

It would also be nice to have some info about where the tier information will be displayed. We can make some good guesses, but that's all they are...guesses.

PGI...guys/girls? Data...we need data. But not too much. I don't want to get IOS.

[DAYLEET]

IraqiWalker, on 28 August 2015 - 02:43 AM, said:

Go Hunchback!

I also think the HBK is the best mech to learn the game on because of everything it can do while forcing you to actually learn to play. It only lack jumpjets but once youve used JJ for a long time on a mech and go back to no jj you realise how much of a crutch they are, even just 1jj can make life so much easier on my Dire(or any other mech for that matter).

[C E Dwyer]

what will happen with full disclosure is what happens with world of tanks, ass hats screaming you all suck and disconnecting before the game has even started.

so one down pretty much assures you lose, though it is extra sweet when the sucking people hand the other team their backsides

[Sonny Black]

Cathy, on 28 August 2015 - 12:18 PM, said:

what will happen with full disclosure is what happens with world of tanks, ass hats screaming you all suck and disconnecting before the game has even started.

so one down pretty much assures you lose, though it is extra sweet when the sucking people hand the other team their backsides

Lets remember Murphy's 4th Law
No matter how hard you try to please everyone, Someone is not going to like it.

[Davers]

IraqiWalker, on 28 August 2015 - 02:43 AM, said:

Why the enforcer, if I may ask? For me, here are the exact reasons why I recommend the hunchback:


That's the problem though. Tier 5 players can't handle LRMs as they are, if we want to buff them so they are decent in top tier play, they decimate lower tier games into ash. So any balance discussion, should also take into account, the impact on these players.

What I said was that both opinions were correct. For a tier 5 player, LRMs are OP, for a tier 1 player, LRMs are trash. Neither one is wrong here. So while complaining about LRMs immediately tells us that the player is in the lower tiers, their cries should not go ignored, just because they are low tier. They won't have a chance to get good, if they leave because of the explosive shower, and not learning how to deal with it. Top that with everyone calling them a noob for dying to a weapon system they don't know how to counter.



For me, LRMs are not a problem, unless it's caustic valley, I'm in my direwolf, and I am abandoned by my team, with no ECM. That's pretty much the only situation where LRMs are close to being a threat to me.



Literally any one that involved discussion about the Arctic Cheetah, the Timberwolf back in the day, and the Direwolf with wave 1, and what followed. Pick any IS vs. Clan thread that dealt with balance, and see the many posts that just bash any suggestion, or statement with "L2P IS/Clan noobs"

1. I like the Enforcer for many of the same reasons you like the Hunchback. Small, JJs, can be built with an asymmetrical build (shield side).

2. As you acknowledge, LRMs become more useless the more experienced you are. It would be stupid to balance them around players who are bad at the game. Just like it would be stupid to say 'Low Elo players are not allowed to run fast light mechs because bad players can't hit them" or "Low Elo players are not allowed to run more than a 30 point Alpha strike because bad players cannot torso twist".

3. I remember 'top tier players' saying the Timberwolf was OP, then other players screaming it wasn't. Then PGI making multiple statements that the Timberwolf was the most powerful mech in the game. So who was right?

[Aresye]

Willard Phule, on 28 August 2015 - 12:23 AM, said:

Here's the part that everyone seems to have failed to recognize.

PGI has no plans to ever come up with a tutorial that actually teaches anyone to do anything.

Had to double check the post date of when you said this.

Yup, you're completely clueless and have no idea of what's going on with the game. Please stop posting now.

[IraqiWalker]

Davers, on 28 August 2015 - 04:26 PM, said:

1. I like the Enforcer for many of the same reasons you like the Hunchback. Small, JJs, can be built with an asymmetrical build (shield side).

2. As you acknowledge, LRMs become more useless the more experienced you are. It would be stupid to balance them around players who are bad at the game. Just like it would be stupid to say 'Low Elo players are not allowed to run fast light mechs because bad players can't hit them" or "Low Elo players are not allowed to run more than a 30 point Alpha strike because bad players cannot torso twist".

Except lights at least get grazed by lasers, and low tier light pilots are just as bad as those shooting at them. So the problem is more self corrective, whereas the skill floor for LRMs is so low, that you literally only need one functioning finger to play an LRM mech, and at low tiers, you probably don't need more than that finger to ruin an entire lance's day.

That's where the problems have been with LRMs, insanely low skill floor, which people like because it means new players, and those with really old rigs can still participate easily, using them, and LRMs rely 80% on the level of their victim, it's the one weapon where if you are hit, it's pretty much almost completely your fault.

So very low skill floor + low level victims = slaughter.

Basically, this is the perfect weapon to illustrate that listening only to top tier player input would be the wrong move, because buffing the system to make it work there, would turn it into an absolute monster in the lower tiers.

Davers, on 28 August 2015 - 04:26 PM, said:

3. I remember 'top tier players' saying the Timberwolf was OP, then other players screaming it wasn't. Then PGI making multiple statements that the Timberwolf was the most powerful mech in the game. So who was right?

Yes, and they had other players telling them L2P, some of which were top tier players themselves.

Aresye Kerensky, on 28 August 2015 - 05:55 PM, said:

Had to double check the post date of when you said this.

Yup, you're completely clueless and have no idea of what's going on with the game. Please stop posting now.

That was a bit on the hostile side Aresye. I don't think not knowing about the new tutorial in the PTS is that big of an offense just yet. In fact, I think I know more people who didn't know about it, than those who did. Happens to the best of us.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 28 August 2015 - 06:53 PM.

[Cookie King]

Anyone know if your individual ranking is for each mech, or overall?

Anyone know if your individual ranking is for each mech, or overall?

Anyone know if your individual ranking is for each mech, or overall?

[IraqiWalker]

Maionaze, on 29 August 2015 - 01:32 AM, said:

Anyone know if your individual ranking is for each mech, or overall?

Anyone know if your individual ranking is for each mech, or overall?

Anyone know if your individual ranking is for each mech, or overall?

overall. You have one score. Instead of the 4 we used to have.

I think if they just make PSR work per weight class, or better yet, per chassis. It will instantly be improved.