767 replies to this topic

[StompyRobot100]

i voted opt in but i honestly couldnt care less about it one way or the other. i just figured rather than everyone getting their panties in a bunch over the, pretty **** if im honest, options given why not take what i think the best of all of them. this way the "who am i fighting" group gets a metric to base the match off of, the "im scared ill look bad" group gets a sense of anonymity and everyone that cares can see exactly where they in the group at large with out getting too specific.

idk. i just dont see where the other options make any real sense big picture

[ShinobiHunter]

The L33T players will still continue to wave their e-peens, the scrubs will still be ignored and the decent people will still be decent. PGI can see everyone's PSR already, so it's not going to affect their decisions on balance, as if they actually cared about player input in balance in the first place. If you're halfway smart, you should know who knows anything about the game and who to ignore. I don't see this changing anything.

This is the internet. If you can't stand a few trolls and jerks, perhaps you should try some offline games. I'm not trying to be rude, but the internet is not the place for people with sensitive dispositions.

[Tropico_Thunder]

I voted opt in but I would like to know the calculations so I know what's being measured. Is it of value or really meaningless?

[Capt_Kobalt]

If you alienate low skilled players, they will leave in droves! Not a good idea! Since PGI is looking at the bottom line all the time. Which is obvious, since the real things like CW and fixing bugs and invisable walls etc never seem to be worked on or fixed. Yep the stuff that will keep your long term spending players, playing the game and not moving on to another game to spend there money. Personaly I think this tier thing should have waited until the game was in working order. Make CW mean somthing, and the bugs were fixed. PGI is making poor decisions on what is important for the long term viability of this game. I have been a gamer many years and I have seen bigger more poupular online games go under for doing just what I see PGI doing. Make your players HAPPY and the money will come. IF not long term = FAIL!

[BananaBlaster]

People will judge others whatever happens, now that the rating is here, you might as well give people the choice to show it or not. It won't change the fact that you'll get 90 damage assaults yelling "noobs" in the chat at the end of battles, the only thing that worries me is statsniping (mainly for actually good players, I don't think I'm included xD).

Also, matchmaking should be able to sort most "tier 5 against tier 1" issues

[Yosharian]

I just want to say thanks to MWOMERCS.com for logging me out while I was posting a huge comment to this thread and, in the process, losing it entirely.

Special shoutout to PGI for being unable to code a website worth ****.

****.

[Davers]

IraqiWalker, on 26 August 2015 - 07:02 AM, said:

But a tier 4/5 player won't ever get the chance to prove them self or their opinion, because they will just be ignored/shot down immediately, on account of being of a lower tier.

I was going to make a long reply, but Fenrisulvyn did it far better than I could.

Spoiler

One thing I will add is that experienced players also don't understand how the game works for new players. They've either forgotten that, or were new players a long time ago, and never bothered with keeping up with new player experience.

For example, many of them will pop into the new player help section of the forum, usually advising new players to pilot meta mechs, and use "optimal" loadouts. That advice seems sound to you, and many others.

It's one of the worst things you can do to a new player.

1st - New players still don't know which end of the gun to point at the enemy, how do you expect them to understand WHY a build is effective?

2nd - Meta mechs are extremely forgiving of piloting mistakes. You'll end up with one trick ponies that don't know how to pilot soon as they switch to another mech. Do you have any idea how difficult it is to re-train pilots who got used to an OP mech? I do, I had to re-train a light mech pilot who was just used to the ECM spider. No idea how to really position, because ECM always kept him covered. No idea how to actually sneak around, because of ECM, and no idea how to do most things properly, because he was using a top of the line mech (it was back then.)

I can add more reasons, but this just illustrates my point that the game is completely different in the lower tiers, compared to the upper ones. On top of that, balance isn't the only type of discussion that happens here.

For example, currently, the Arctic Cheetah is the problem mech of the month, due to borked hitboxes, over-quirkiness, hit reg, and a few other problems. Every single thread has at least one guy saying "anyone who complains about the ACH is a noob who doesn't know how to play" Good news is that we have people from all tiers complaining about it.

However, with tiers made public, those problems, and attitudes are only made worse, not better.



At the end of the day for me, I'm looking at this with one question in mind: Will this make the forums better, or worse? So far, I think it will make things worse.

Good arguments and ideas will stand on their own merits, regardless of Tier.

I would recommend a Stormcrow over a Vindicator to a new player 10 out of 10 times. Why wouldn't you want a new player on a mech that was 'extremely forgiving of pilot mistakes'?

As for the ACH, you see we don't need a tier system for people to act like that. Plenty of players claimed the Timberwolf was totally not OP (and that PGI were liars for saying so). Now it would be interesting to see if the person making the n00b remarks was a Tier 1 being condescending or a Tier 4 defending a FOTM mech.

Yosharian, on 26 August 2015 - 09:53 AM, said:

I just want to say thanks to MWOMERCS.com for logging me out while I was posting a huge comment to this thread and, in the process, losing it entirely.

Special shoutout to PGI for being unable to code a website worth ****.

****.

All the damn time.... I usually copy every thread before I hit Post.

[Yosharian]

Davers, on 26 August 2015 - 10:15 AM, said:

All the damn time.... I usually copy every thread before I hit Post.

I usually do as well, for some reason I forgot to do it this time.

[MadLibrarian]

I'm okay with public display, but opt in is usually better. I would however still like to see a display in each match of the average tier of each team, and/or which tier the match is in.

Good things PGI, Good things. Keep up the good work!

[Ronin Wario]

Really bad poll. LOL.

[WVAnonymous]

I voted for "mandatory" because opt-in will be tier 1, tier 2, and "embarrassed", so why make it optional?

If I'm a tier 5, I want to know there are lots of other tier 5 around (20% by definition) and we can all pilot our LRM DDC Atlases and AC5 Cicadas to our heart's content.

[Bilbo]

WVAnonymous, on 26 August 2015 - 01:41 PM, said:

I voted for "mandatory" because opt-in will be tier 1, tier 2, and "embarrassed", so why make it optional?

If I'm a tier 5, I want to know there are lots of other tier 5 around (20% by definition) and we can all pilot our LRM DDC Atlases and AC5 Cicadas to our heart's content.

Why would you want to force someone who might be "embarrassed" by their tier to show it? I don't intend to show mine no matter what it is. I'll let everyone assume I'm tier 5 whether I am or not.

[E_Crow]

Personally I think they should take a page from CS:GO and not actually show everyone's rank until the end of the match so that people don't just quit because the opposite team has more players of a higher tier.

[MechaBattler]

Opt in. Just because if someone wants to try to shame me into showing my tier. I'll ignore them and continue on with my life.

It'll be a nice way of weeding out pretentious internet tough guys. :3

[Graugger]

This is irrelevant seeing as you guys shut off the flippin PSR system!

-.-

Been getting Tier 1 teams the entire weekend.

[IraqiWalker]

Graugger, on 26 August 2015 - 04:18 PM, said:

This is irrelevant seeing as you guys shut off the flippin PSR system!

-.-

Been getting Tier 1 teams the entire weekend.

If you are tier 3, or above, you will be running into tier 2 and tier 1 players a lot.

Davers, on 26 August 2015 - 10:15 AM, said:

Good arguments and ideas will stand on their own merits, regardless of Tier.

I would recommend a Stormcrow over a Vindicator to a new player 10 out of 10 times. Why wouldn't you want a new player on a mech that was 'extremely forgiving of pilot mistakes'?

As for the ACH, you see we don't need a tier system for people to act like that. Plenty of players claimed the Timberwolf was totally not OP (and that PGI were liars for saying so). Now it would be interesting to see if the person making the n00b remarks was a Tier 1 being condescending or a Tier 4 defending a FOTM mech.


All the damn time.... I usually copy every thread before I hit Post.

Good arguments are already having trouble standing on their own merits, before we factor tiers in. People still wave their e-peens, and use those as evidence of why they should be right, when they are wrong. This includes people who are at higher tiers.

The Stormcrow is a very good mech, and I can recommend it to new pilots, but I would put it below the Hunchback in terms of return on the investment. It's better of the new player doesn't start off with a stormcrow, because they are still new, their Elo/PSR is still very low, allowing them to use a mech like the HBK, and learn how to pilot mechs properly, before they start raising their PSR, which then makes transitioning into any other mech easier.

On the other hand, they start off with the SCR, in an environment that is already very forgiving of mistakes, and by the time they are done eliting them, their PSR is so high, they will struggle brutally with any other mech. This is before factoring in the C-Bill cost they will need to elite the chassis.

Only times I advise a new player to get the stormcrow as their starting mech, is if they liked it, or they know they want to play clans.

---

If a new player has no idea which mech they like more, then we discuss their play style and which mechs work best for it, or advise them to start with the HBK variant that suits their needs.

I can still work with a meta mech suggestion, but getting them to use a meta build is where problems REALLY kick into high gear. Gauss+lasers for example is not new player friendly. They still have a hard time walking and aiming, now you want to tack on charge time, and high heat management?

These are considerations that usually don't come into account when a high tier player is giving advice to new players. They're trying to get the new player the best mech, and the best gear, while forgetting that new players need training wheels first, before they can use that top line gear, or even understand how, and why it's good.

Let's say for the sake of argument I'm a tier 5 player, for any number of reasons you want, but I know exactly what I'm talking about here. A tier 1 player comes in, and starts denouncing my advice, saying that comp players use X, and that's why new players should go with X. As a new player, that advice is actually damaging to them, we've seen it happen. However, here they are, seeing a tier 1 player, and a tier 5 player. They don't know anything about the game, or us, just our tiers.

Tell me they're not going to follow the Tier 1 player, when all he needs to do is keep referring to my tier, instead of dealing with my argument? If I was in that situation, that tier 5 player, who's actually giving good advice, is probably gonna get ignored by me, because I don't even have the basic knowledge to fully understand why one argument is better than the other. I see the tiers. Tier 1 must be a great player. So I'll follow his advice, even though it's bad in this situation.

Spoiler

By the way, I would never recommend a Vindi to a new player. I have a hard time recommending it to veterans, so it's a no no to new players. we've put a lot of thought into what works, and doesn't work for new players, and the feedback we get from them helps us out immensely, in both refining our advice, and also seeing how successful it is.

---

You brought up LRMs before as an example, and it's a pretty good one. LRMs are difficult to balance because they are paper weights in higher tiers, but absolute apocalypse in lower ones. So trying to balance it in a way that makes it work in the upper tiers, without it reducing the lower ones to ash has been nigh on impossible. Last time we buffed the weapon's speed, we called it LRMageddon, the LRMpocalypse ... etc.

Neither side is wrong, hilariously. LRMs are OP, and trash at the same time. Because the two are playing very different games. I play in the tiers where people have AMS, and bring lots of ECM, so LRMs are almost unheard of. (Most LRM mechs I've seen in the past week was 3 mechs in one mech, spread between the two teams)

On the other hand. There are people playing in no-ECM, no-AMS, no-idea-what-cover-is land, and for them LRMs are the harbinger of death.


TL;DR: You want advice/suggestions/arguments to stand on their own merits? Then no tier system should be implemented. It adds unnecessary weight to some argument, and detracts from other, without ever accounting for mechanical knowledge. I can stop playing all my other mechs, and only role out my meta Direwolf, and pump my PSR through the roof, because PSR is no longer based on mech chassis, or weight class. It's just one big score.

I can have no idea why mechanically this build is OP, or not, and still easily hit tier 2. Suddenly my moronic suggestions on every topic are worth more, because I have a tier badge that says I can shoot things really well. Without actually knowing how the gun works, nor why it works that way.

Edited by IraqiWalker, 26 August 2015 - 05:17 PM.

[Wintersdark]

Fenrisulvyn, on 26 August 2015 - 05:28 AM, said:

"A good example is the endless discussion about LRM's. Contrary to the fact that 99.9% of Tier1 players regard them as inferior and unreliable compared to any other weapon system. They have not been used in any competitive matches since before the end of CB yet we still have people openly crying for nerfs (because they can't figure out to handle them in the lower tiers), advocating them as super competitive to new players and so on.

In this case the views of lower tiers should be just plainly ignored because they don't play in an environment where game mechanics are fully understood and used (and to some point abused) for maximum combat efficiency."


No. And this perfectly illustrates the problem of ignoring someone because of their tier. LRMs *are* effective at the lower tiers, and they are a lot of fun to play with. For my first 3 months here I had a blast using them. And it wasn't until my 4 month that I even needed to bring TAG or equip ATD. If I had been thrown into the Guass curve, I doubt I would have enjoyed the game enough to stick around. Top players forget what it was like to be a noob, and it affects their judgement.

You can be the cream of the top tier and still not have the wisdom to understand that the majority of the player base does not play at the comp level and never will, and that they can have fun and be effective with LRM boats.

What's going to happen here is people will start making arguments from authority ("I outrank you so I must be right") when instead the arguments should be weighed on their merits, not on who is making them.

I'd just like to say that, as someone who enjoys helping newer players and those with not whining questions...

For all the reasons you note, having public tier information is useful. If a player complains about OP LRM's and is T5, then you know why, and can explain it better with real data. Likewise, the T1 player complaining LRM's are worthless? There you have it.

This removes the ambiguity. So often, players think they are better than they are, and this makes those discussions very difficult to have because they devolve into "No, because you suck". Public tier information removes the insult in that - LRM's ARE OP at low tier play. That is because your targets don't know how to avoid them, but that's still the fact.

It would be very helpful to be able to sort these discussions, and explain how things are and see the context of their opinions.

Yes, some will simply discount a players opinion simply because he's low tier, but that happens anyways. At least with public tier information we can view statements within an accurate context of the game for that player.

[MechWarrior319348]

I was dropped on my head when I was little, at least 5 times. And i frequently sniff paint. Don't you think my skill level suffers enough already without being made public!

[WVAnonymous]

Bilbo, on 26 August 2015 - 02:16 PM, said:

Why would you want to force someone who might be "embarrassed" by their tier to show it? I don't intend to show mine no matter what it is. I'll let everyone assume I'm tier 5 whether I am or not.

Mostly to emphasize how silly this poll is and how unhelpful the tiering system number would be.

And I see you enough to be sure you must be tier 4.

[Kjudoon]

Once again for the recors. A tier 3 team will seem like tier 1s to a tier 5 player. It is skill differential that makes it feel that way.