435 replies to this topic

[Stealth Fox]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 20 October 2015 - 06:35 PM, said:

...not much has changed so it makes me wonder just WHAT was IGP's fault exactly

Yeah.. you're right, it IS looking more and more like another excuse. But don't worry, once they saw we didn't approve of their failed idea, They stopped reading the forum.

[STEF_]

we had 3/3/3/3 for a reason.
And I want it back.

Last patch screwed up group que, where you can see abomination like 10 stormcrow+2 BJ-1x


REVERT 3/3/3/3.

[Fle]

Stefka Kerensky, on 20 October 2015 - 10:40 PM, said:

we had 3/3/3/3 for a reason.
And I want it back.

Last patch screwed up group que, where you can see abomination like 10 stormcrow+2 BJ-1x


REVERT 3/3/3/3.

you really believe 12 bmmu premade with 3\3\3\3 have less chances vs 2-3 man groups salad?

[Leopardo]

revert 3 3 3 3 or not but let premade play against 8+ groups!)

[STEF_]

Fle, on 21 October 2015 - 04:29 AM, said:

you really believe 12 bmmu premade with 3\3\3\3 have less chances vs 2-3 man groups salad?

I believe that 2-3 man salad would have more fun.

(I saw salads beating premade, tho. Now I see this highly improbable)

[Fle]

Stefka Kerensky, on 21 October 2015 - 04:52 AM, said:

I believe that 2-3 man salad would have more fun.

(I saw salads beating premade, tho. Now I see this highly improbable)

I saw them as well, I was lucky to take part in them, and over tonnage helps a lot vs skilled premade, I think if those bmmu guys have met 6 TW + 6 DW, we would see another video, salty one

[PharmEcis]

http://mwomercs.com/...and-how-to-fix/


System is working as intended. Just needs a tweak to make it perfect. Search times yesterday was most excellent!

Cap the same chassis number to two or three and all the bitching and moaning about this new system goes out the door!

[grayson marik]

http://mwomercs.com/...actually-works/

[TheNoobLord]

I think tonnage limits is the dumbest idea possibly intorduced
this is ********, now I cant even play a battle with my brother and we both play our dire wolves or something, somebody has to take a light and not have fun, or NEITHER of us get to have fun and we compromise in some heavy or medium
regardless, this entire idea is ********, because tonnage isnt even a relevant factor, 12 cheetahs can kill 12 daishis if they try, so why introduce a ******** mechanic that will only serve to reduce fun, not letting people play assaults in groups, effectively

Edited by TheNoobLord, 21 October 2015 - 10:13 AM.

[zudukai]

i like the new system, but it needs some additional refinement, people are still too unfamiliar to the setup to really share an educated opinion.

the group queue now sits somewhere in between how the CW drops feel and normal group queue, very refreshing and all this flexibility is really interesting.

8 ACH and 4 DWF is NOT the be all end all deck!

12 TDR is not the be all end all deck!

if you play strong in one way, you weaken yourself in other areas, this can be mitigated with a chassis variants but still leaves you weak to another tailored deck.

learn the counters, (2 streak crows > 4+ lights) learn how to fit your mechs into a drop, experiment and grow.

the alternative is stagnation and repetition.

[SocialistKiwi]

I think there needs to be a cap on the number of Mechs from one weight class, eg you can't have more them 4 or 5 Mechs of the Heavy wight class in a group drop. Because the way it is laid out now I can see a twelve man dropping with twelve 65 ton Mechs in a match. if you made it so there was just a blanket no more then 4 or 5 lights, mediums, heavys and assaults it means you can control that meta drop a bit more.

[Wintersdark]

... I don't really see how 12 Catapults is a problem, but 6 shadowhawks and 6 Orion's is not.

If your objection is because of specific mechs, that's a mech balance issue. 3/3/3/3 doesn't mitigate that anyways (3dwf/3tbr/3scr/3ach). And 12 mediums? Really? Are we really complaining about too many people taking mediums in a drop now?

Again, this is a mech balance problem, not a group composition problem.

[InsaneRotta]

Since the new tonnage system has been added I've been againgst 12 man groups doing zerg swarms using only two chassies. One was with 9 ECM Arctic Cheetas backed up by 3 Atlas D-DCs, and the other was 10 all energy Stormcrows and two BJ-1Xs.

Both matches were super quick stomps and honestly very exploitative feeling. But hey, the tonnage limits allows this so I GUESS it's all fine and dandy. <3

[chaas]

It seems like an oversight that this scenario is possible. I'd prefer to see a mixed version of what we had and what we have now. A tier system, in which no group can take more than four of one 'mech class, limited by weight tied to the number of players in the group would alleviate this particular situation. Here's a link to the image, as it's too big to post here.

Edited by chaas, 24 October 2015 - 01:08 PM.

[C E Dwyer]

Feed back

I can't put hand on heart and say this is constructive I can only say how I feel without raging, I can only make this statement.

The changes this week have exasperated me beyond belief, and have caused me to cancel Origins highlander pack.

I'm tired of it all, I see so many good idea's by other people completely ignored, while these new changes have sucked the fun out of grouping with my unit, while changing nothing

So I will say this, that I'm sure people will see as a threat, but I want to present as a statement.

Leave grouping in CW alone, do not attempt to inflict this terrible new system on it, I'm fed up and close to quitting, if you value my custom leave the weight balance and group sizes in CW alone

Edited by Cathy, 24 October 2015 - 05:19 PM.

[Rattazustra]

Public drops and CW drops are very different.

When I drop light in one wave of CW, but heavier in another wave, I do not have a clear disadvantage.
This however is different in public drops. If my team has significantly less tonnage than the other team, I may be at a HUGE disadvantage. Not necessarily, but there is a high potential.

The worst case scenario would be a 12 man team, all dropping 50 ton mechs, facing 6 two-man teams, all dropping 100 ton mechs. That would result in 1200t vs. 600t. As unlikely as it is, this IS in fact pretty much the intention of the whole system. Make the smaller groups significantly heavier in the misguided belief that this evens out the effects of good teamwork on part of the 12 man team. Unfortunately this is complete nonsense.

The first incorrect assumption is that larger groups have better teamwork than smaller groups. While it is POSSIBLE that they do, it is not an effect directly created by the larger group. Some people drop with other people, because they have friends. Strange concept, I know. Having friends with whom you play does not mean those friends are as good as yourself, or that they would do what you say. I don't have that problem with my own mates, but I know of many people who do. Why are they punished? For playing with friends?!

The second incorrect assumption is that tonnage could possibly compensate for skill. This is not the case.

It also screws people who use ammo-fed weapons, because the heavier the enemy team gets, the more ammunition it takes to take them down, which means that people with ammo consuming weapons will run out before they can win the fight, without anything they could do to prevent that. This is an indirect nerf to all ammo weapons and it is NOT a fair one, cause it is only one-sided, to the disadvantage of the players with more friends.

[Drunk Canuck]

I have an honest question after last night's town hall because it all relates to things like group queue and unit play in CW.

Why is it that all the time and resources were used to create VOIP, which was a huge issue for mixed groups versus 12 man's for quite a long time? Why waste the resources putting in a feature that puts success in the hands of groups regardless.of size? Why put in a feature that helps solo players organize their CW drops if they get matched against groups? Why bother when you now wish to let these people take all responsibility out of their own hands and put their losses in the hands of 12 man groups?

It isn't our fault that we are better organized as well as better players. Stop putting the onus on our 12 man groups and tell these wimps who don't like to lose to either man up or skill up. MWO is a team game, teams shouldn't be getting poop on their chests because they happen to acknowledge that MWO is a team game and want to win as a team.

[War Steiner]

Let me start off by saying that I am happy with the change to weight limits. Now PLEASE, PLEASE, I BEG YOU PLEASE get to work on CW.

So on to your comments in the TownHall. I am totally against limiting to groups of 4. However, I do have a possible solution. If you want to scrub current group queue, make ALL groups 4, 8, or 12. If you are a group of 2, you need to go to LFG and pick up someone or get picked up. I would also like to have the group of 4 have weight limits (rather than by class). I believe this would massively speed the matching process...no?

Let me finish with I am happy that you have made changes to the mech lab, VOIP, balance, new mechs, PSR, Mech Academy, and more. You have done more this year than in the previous two years! That is awesome! But many of us have been awaiting patiently. Some of us are only here for CW. We want to fight for our House and win glory. Screw noobs and feed the 1%!

[Fire for Effect]

basing balance on weight is simply nonsense for the simple reason that equal weight does tell you nothing about combat potential even same chassis can have VASTLY different combat potential:

Wolverine 7D pretty much worthless junk; contender for worst mech in game
Wolverine 6R quite powerful

even if you take the same chassis you can vastly change your combat potential

Banshee original: absurdly fast Assault with 1 PPC 1 AC5 and 1 small Laser.
Banshee well pretty much anything else you see today....

Both facts show clearly that trying to archive balance by evening out tonnage is complete nonsense.

Finally bring Battle Value to the Board....


Also the entire limitation of groups seems completely nonsensical. If 1-2% of players according to PGI are in 10-12 men groups.
How can such a small number be a problem???

Just as in the past when solo players were whining about stomps and PGI relented to those whiners and seperated the group and solo queues. Guess what happened.... stomps happened just as often in the solo queue.

So they ruined the game for absolutely no reason for the group players. And before someone asks yes the limitation to 4 people for a group was also already tested, guess what it did? It changed nothing except that a large amount of people simply stopped playing and surprise surprise it did not change anything because groups were not the reason for stomps.

for more just look here:
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4668200

[Karl Streiger]

well even if tonnage is the worst option of "balancing" teams

please roll back to the first variant - maybe with some tweaking - stuff in MWO is not linear really not.

The current system is linear - the difference of a 3 towards a 4 men team is almost as equal as the difference between a 9 and a 10 men team. but the gain of the additional person is complete different.



it should look like those graphs on the left: the first attempt and my suggestion
The numbers are not fixed
- but you should also see how groups should be composed for the MM