276 replies to this topic

[Scar Glamour]

Seeing how the game expects me to hard-carry every match I want to have the slightest hope of winning, I am guessing Tier 1. Or even Tier 0. PSR probably counts me as the best mech pilot ever existing.

The fact that this is as far from the truth as humanly possible makes me very, very disappointed with it and wanting to go back to ELO.

[Durant Carlyle]

lol

Didn't even know they switched from Elo to PSR -- haven't been playing much or paying attention to patch notes and such lately. Did some research and I'm cool with it. I'd even be cool with PSR display being mandatory.

I'll be turning PSR forum display on as soon as it becomes available on Tuesday.

[Prc]

Chat will be toxic af

[jper4]

I just found it odd that the completely new first time player is put into tier 4 not tier 5 since in theory they should be at their worst at that point of playing. or it's felt that getting stomped a few times by tier 2 players to get knocked down to tier 5 is beneficial somehow?

[DuncanMechLeod]

mmh, display of tier works for me already.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

Prc, on 15 September 2015 - 10:07 AM, said:

Chat will be toxic af

it isnt now?

Tanar, on 15 September 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:

I just found it odd that the completely new first time player is put into tier 4 not tier 5 since in theory they should be at their worst at that point of playing. or it's felt that getting stomped a few times by tier 2 players to get knocked down to tier 5 is beneficial somehow?

Or wait till they get one tier better and are farmed by tier 1s

[Alistair Winter]

I look forward to it. It'll be nice to have a goal beyond the 10,000 assists achievement or saving up enough money to buy a billion C-bills worth of modules for my mechs.

The old endgame was about grinding to buy stuff. The new endgame is about earning the right to play the best opponents.

I'm cool with that.

[sycocys]

I'm with you there, would like it if there was an -open- one that let everyone play and one for ranking. This leveling mechs is sometimes pretty brutal until you figure out how you want to play them, and then its still just rng lottery if you get a team that is willing to play as a team or not in solo drops.

[1453 R]

I'd be shocked if I was higher than T3. Fully expecting T4, would not be entirely surprised, though I would be disappointed, if I landed in T5 considering my casual play hours and fumble-fingered failure in the Aiming Skills department. And my insistence on continually trying to finish grinding out silly things like Ice Hamsters, or play 'Mechs without gauss rifles. Every time I drop in that Quack/20 Warhawk, I can feel my PSR shrinking somewhere deep inside my pants.

I'll probably display my inevitable T4 just to defuse the equally inevitable "ALL OPT-OUTS ARE T5 PANZEES" nonsense, but I'm in the camp that figures this was a horrible idea to start with. Knowing your own personal tier is a good idea for people who want to improve and track that improvement, but I don't need to know Bishop's T5 to twit him about how awful the Warhammer is.

Love ya, Bish

On a more serious note - tier rankings should have no bearing on most discussions here in the forums. Which is not to say we're not a week away from a serious push by the ultracomp community to the tune of "Not Tier 1? Stop talking. Now". And, of course, the hooting hooligans in T2 who figure their teenaged Monster-fueled reflexes give them all the authority they need to be as big a sack of monkey droppings as they'd like on the forums and we'll all have to swallow it.

Blegh. What a disaster.

[Roadkill]

Jman5, on 15 September 2015 - 08:32 AM, said:

My experience with other games is that the most toxic people come from middling to upper-middle ranks. They never address their mistakes that are holding them back and instead always blame external factors like teammates and balance.

Yep. Tier 3 has all the ragers. Tier 2 has all the ******.

Tier 1 guys are usually either pretty nice or just standoffish.

Tier 4 is where people just want to have fun. Tier 5 can't identify fun, let alone a target.

For the record, I expect to be T3 or if I'm really lucky T2. I need to work on my raging and being a ***** in order to move up.

[TLBFestus]

DuncanMechLeod, on 15 September 2015 - 10:12 AM, said:

mmh, display of tier works for me already.

What? That pitiful, hard to see PSR to the right of your post.

Get something better, more visible, that people can see easily. There must be a place where you can find something like a signature with your chosen PSR rating......

.
.
.
.
\./

[Bishop Steiner]

Titannium, on 15 September 2015 - 01:04 AM, said:

R u rdy ? (for forum sh*tstorm)

yup....cuz I don't really care, lol.

[Zolaz]

Im Bronze 6 tier.

[mogs01gt]

With the way I've been playing, Im tier 5 for sure!

[Mister Blastman]

Tier 4.5 was a happy place.

[Jman5]

1453 R, on 15 September 2015 - 10:30 AM, said:

On a more serious note - tier rankings should have no bearing on most discussions here in the forums. Which is not to say we're not a week away from a serious push by the ultracomp community to the tune of "Not Tier 1? Stop talking. Now". And, of course, the hooting hooligans in T2 who figure their teenaged Monster-fueled reflexes give them all the authority they need to be as big a sack of monkey droppings as they'd like on the forums and we'll all have to swallow it.

Blegh. What a disaster.

The only time I support bringing out the rank card is when someone makes a baseless claim. If someone writes a post saying "medium lasers are bad." and there is no supporting evidence one way or the other, all I can go on is their rank in game. If they are high ranked, then at least I know they know what they are doing. If they are low rank, then they probably don't have a strong grasp of the game mechanics.
My advice is if someone wants to make a meaningful post about balance, bring facts. If he is going to say something is true because he says so, I have no choice but to weigh his opinion against his tier.

Imagine you are in a hospital and the nurse says one thing, while the doctor says something else. The nurse may be right, but in the absence of any evidence, I'm going to defer to what the doctor says.

[Davers]

Tanar, on 15 September 2015 - 10:10 AM, said:

I just found it odd that the completely new first time player is put into tier 4 not tier 5 since in theory they should be at their worst at that point of playing. or it's felt that getting stomped a few times by tier 2 players to get knocked down to tier 5 is beneficial somehow?

I have seen tier 5 behavior, and I think a new player would be better than that.

[1453 R]

Jman5, on 15 September 2015 - 10:55 AM, said:

The only time I support bringing out the rank card is when someone makes a baseless claim. If someone writes a post saying "medium lasers are bad." and there is no supporting evidence one way or the other, all I can go on is their rank in game. If they are high ranked, then at least I know they know what they are doing. If they are low rank, then they probably don't have a strong grasp of the game mechanics.
My advice is if someone wants to make a meaningful post about balance, bring facts. If he is going to say something is true because he says so, I have no choice but to weigh his opinion against his tier.

Imagine you are in a hospital and the nurse says one thing, while the doctor says something else. The nurse may be right, but in the absence of any evidence, I'm going to defer to what the doctor says.

If someone makes a baseless claim, it should be simple enough to refute him by bringing out your base - i.e. illustrate with facts, rather than say "you're wrong because you're a low-tier idiot."

In your example, if someone said "medium lasers are bad", the first thing to do would be to ask "Which medium lasers? There are four of them, you know." If the response was "Sphere standard", then frankly he's right - 5/4 for a 270-range dogfighting laser is pretty mediocre and has been for a very long time. It requires a drop back down to 3 heat, and could use a reduction in burntime to try and make up the impulse damage advantage the cERML has over it. I've been advocating 6/5 cERML, 5/3 iML, and eventually 5/4 iERML, with 1.25s, 0.8s, and 1s burntimes respectively for a while now.

if he said something like "cERML is bad", then I think we can all just ignore his claim as obviously being trollbait with or without his tier becoming involved, ne?

There's really no reason to ever bludgeon someone into silence using their tier as the club. If you can't take the time to make a proper argument against whatever point is being raised, then clearly the matter isn't important enough for you to weigh in on.

[Balder Shadow]

Catalina Steiner, on 15 September 2015 - 04:41 AM, said:

I'm very sure that PGI and the moderators have an answer for this kind of bullying that we will see. I am also supporting the idea to delete the option of watching the own tier and the tier of others if someone has bullied others because of comparing their tier to his own. There will be consequences if some members cannot deal with this kind of information in an adult and rational way.

I'm sure the Tier 1 players will have the same level of decorum on and off the battlefield.

GGClose!

Then again, in a battle of wits they may be defenseless.

[Bishop Steiner]

1453 R, on 15 September 2015 - 11:05 AM, said:

If someone makes a baseless claim, it should be simple enough to refute him by bringing out your base - i.e. illustrate with facts, rather than say "you're wrong because you're a low-tier idiot."

In your example, if someone said "medium lasers are bad", the first thing to do would be to ask "Which medium lasers? There are four of them, you know." If the response was "Sphere standard", then frankly he's right - 5/4 for a 270-range dogfighting laser is pretty mediocre and has been for a very long time. It requires a drop back down to 3 heat, and could use a reduction in burntime to try and make up the impulse damage advantage the cERML has over it. I've been advocating 6/5 cERML, 5/3 iML, and eventually 5/4 iERML, with 1.25s, 0.8s, and 1s burntimes respectively for a while now.

if he said something like "cERML is bad", then I think we can all just ignore his claim as obviously being trollbait with or without his tier becoming involved, ne?

There's really no reason to ever bludgeon someone into silence using their tier as the club. If you can't take the time to make a proper argument against whatever point is being raised, then clearly the matter isn't important enough for you to weigh in on.

this.

No offense, but ones "Skill level" often is more do to reflexes and in MWO, team support than necessarily great and deep mechanics understanding. Being a great shot, for instance doesn't mean ya know squat about balance issues. From my experience, a rather sizable of comp skilled players simply follow the leader when it comes to Meta, etc.

Mid you, they likely have to at least have some decent tactical skills on top, and are dang good players..... but to assume being a good jock means good grasp of balance? It's pretty funny how many engineers, race car mechanics, etc are rather less than great at driving cars and flying jets....while many of the best pilots and drivers in the world couldn't wrench on and ix their own gear if their life depended on it.

One thing in no way assures the other, and there have been PLENTY of Comp players making really badly thought out arguments as far as balance mechanics. Admittedly, plenty of bad ideas from non-comps too, but how twitchy you are, knowing what the meta is, etc, doesn't equate to knowing how to fix it. Plenty of people without twitch skills and good teams (or hours to devote to play each day) understand what works and why.