435 replies to this topic

[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

[Surn]

Latest google docs spreadsheet with current tonnages.

This spreadsheet shows the min/max across the various number of groups that can comprise a group drop. You can edit the blue fields to find a better balance. You can also save off your own version.

[Druarc]

Really enjoying this but not sure why the 4 and 8 man groups are being punished.

[Magna Canus]

Did the 12 Dragon 1N thing, pure evil on a stick.

[Ritter von der traurigen Gestalt]

I suggest to exchange the mech class column against a tonnage colmun in the public group window. This information is now more interesting.

[Ritter von der traurigen Gestalt]

When a new player is preparing to join our group I'm always wondering how mutch tonnage is available for him. This information would be also valuable.

[zudukai]

Ritter von der traurigen Gestalt, on 11 November 2015 - 01:02 PM, said:

When a new player is preparing to join our group I'm always wondering how mutch tonnage is available for him. This information would be also valuable.

They keep it updated in the "command chair" subforum

http://mwomercs.com/...tonnage-values/

[Ritter von der traurigen Gestalt]

zudukai, on 11 November 2015 - 01:44 PM, said:

They keep it updated in the "command chair" subforum

http://mwomercs.com/...tonnage-values/

I know, my previous post was may be not specific enough. What I meant is an ingame information how mutch tonnage is available for the next player.

Edit Reason: three beer

Edited by Ritter von der traurigen Gestalt, 11 November 2015 - 02:09 PM.

[pwnface]

Goldhawk, on 19 October 2015 - 09:47 AM, said:

Do not forget that yes there may be tonnage limitations, but the technology available is NOT equilivant.

A 75 ton Timber Wolf vs a 75 ton Black Knight usually ends in a painful match for the Black Knight unless the Timber Wolf is already damaged.

Depends on the pilot and loadout. Gas Guzzler would probably take the Black Knight over the TBR at this point...
The TBR can't do a 63 pinpoint damage alpha effectively, the Black Knight can.

[Raging Owlbear]

I've read a lot of this topic and will be honest that I don't know what the tonnage restrictions should be. I've seen some pretty good ideas in the thread.

What I do know is that 600 tons for a 12 man sucks. Sucks really, really bad... I mean, an 8-man gets 500 tons. I don't know what the remaining 4 man is allowed to take, but I'm pretty sure it's way more than the remaining 100 tons.

My unit used to really enjoy 12 man games. We didn't always dominate because we were often matched with other groups that had 8, 10 or 12 on the other side and games were close and competitive. Fun.

Running a 12 man just plain stinks now. Over the last few weeks, I've played in several 12 man games with my unit... and we almost never win. Because the meta now is for other teams to run in 8-man groups to maximize coordination with only a minor loss of tonnage. An 8-man team wins most of the time now, especially if the remaining 4-man don't play completely stupid.

As a 12 man, we are crushed because the tonnage just isn't there and we rarely get matched with other 12 man groups, because no one else wants to run in 12's anymore.

So the 12 man team is ruined for the game. It makes no sense to run in one any more because it's pure frustration and my unit, which used to be great fun to play in, is playing less frequently and starting to give up on the game. It's no fun to lose again and again and again because a 12 man has to play with one leg and one arm tied behind its back.

I've spent a lot of money on this game and I'm pretty irritated... because I was having fun... Not because we dominated, but because matches were at least competitive.

Now they completely stink. Please fix this.

Edited by Lt Waldo, 10 December 2015 - 08:41 PM.

[Surn]

I fail to see how a 12 man of artic cheaters could possibly lose.

[SkippyT72]

I'd guess the same way a 12 man of Firestarters would but then again I think you see Artic Cheeta's in your sleep, must have touched you wrong at some point, should we report them?

[Foxwalker]

Dropping in 7-10 man and 12 man groups in Public queue is hard mode now not easy mode. Interesting. Yesterday our 10 plus 2 had a tonnage amount that was almost 50% less than the enemy team. They had 7 Assaults, 4 Direwolfs 2 Atlas and a Stalker.
While I understand that previously communication in Public drops was an issue, it is now much less a factor with in game voip.

My suggestion would be to take the previous 3/3/3/3 standard and base the weights on that say if you have a 12 man the max weight would be 3x100 / 3x75 / 3x55 / 3x35 = 795. 600 is way too low, limiting larger groups to mostly Mediums. (In fact 600/12 =50).

[Necromantion]

The major problems affecting CW are not going to be resolved by tonnage changes. The issue isnt one faction being superior when it comes to the tools available.

The issue is the game itself doesnt give enough incentives for players to play CW as far as rewards, bragging rights, depth of game play, variability of game play and so forth. Want to do something to make things interesting? Make different planets have different possible tonnages but keep them close to if not equal between factions. Also the intricacy of this game isnt stressed enough to new players to MW games that this really isnt COD and that team work is a non disputable requirement.

Tonnage tweaking wont fix your major problems.

[Darwins Dog]

Necromantion, on 20 January 2016 - 08:57 AM, said:

The major problems affecting CW are not going to be resolved by tonnage changes. The issue isnt one faction being superior when it comes to the tools available.

The issue is the game itself doesnt give enough incentives for players to play CW as far as rewards, bragging rights, depth of game play, variability of game play and so forth. Want to do something to make things interesting? Make different planets have different possible tonnages but keep them close to if not equal between factions. Also the intricacy of this game isnt stressed enough to new players to MW games that this really isnt COD and that team work is a non disputable requirement.

Tonnage tweaking wont fix your major problems.

ssshhh....

No one tell him that this is about group queue, not CW. Let's just let it go and see how big the text gets.

[Drunk Canuck]

Give 12's another 25 tons,

[Azural]

12 man group is severely handicapped. 12 man groups should get at least 80 more tons. Even with a well coordinated team, half of us are forced to run lights. or all of us run mediums. does that really sound fair when the matchmaker puts us against a pub group with no lights???

[Bjoern Jorgensson]

I agree - the tonnage penalty for a 12 man group ist too severe - If I´ve got the choice between playing with a full company or solo pugging i chose solo (even if solo is terrible!)
12 player groups should definately recieve more tonnage! at least 60 tons

[Fox the Apprentice]

Bjoern Jorgensson, on 04 July 2016 - 09:58 AM, said:

I agree - the tonnage penalty for a 12 man group ist too severe - If I´ve got the choice between playing with a full company or solo pugging i chose solo (even if solo is terrible!)
12 player groups should definately recieve more tonnage! at least 60 tons

Solo isn't terrible, I play it all the time!

[Husker Dude]

I'm not sure if there's a better thread for this, but I think there's some room for improvement in the matchmaker with tonnage.



8 assault mechs on the other side of this match!