145 replies to this topic

[Dimento Graven]

pwnface, on 09 October 2015 - 01:26 PM, said:

You realize that there are players that have overall 11:1 KDR or higher who are in Tier 3 right? The Tier system is literally an XP grind if you aren't terrible.

...

>>IF<< you've had some sort of circumstance where your performance has been 'artificially' bad for some reason (like craptastic PC and/or internet connection, doing nothing but grinding skills on new 'mechs, intentionally playing the game while hitting your head with a hammer) then you're correct. All it will require to get to higher tiers is simply play and perform well.

However, the key words of your statement are, "...if you aren't terrible..." which should probably be, "...if you can consistently perform well..."

That's the key.

At a minimum the Tiers might display a player's understanding of the game's mechanics and how to operate within them.

I certainly would not trust a Tier 4 or 5's explanation of gauss, convergence, and how to lead targets over that of a Tier 2 or 3 player's explanation.

[Adiuvo]

The Atlas Overlord, on 09 October 2015 - 01:04 PM, said:

#rekt

Not bad, though given your KDR and avg. damage your w/l is low. I'm guessing that you sit in the far back and just shoot LRMs all day, which is why it's not higher. Pushing is what ends up winning games, as well as sharing armor. You're doing neither with your playstyle (which is another reason why LRMs are bad).

[pwnface]

Dimento Graven, on 09 October 2015 - 02:03 PM, said:

>>IF<< you've had some sort of circumstance where your performance has been 'artificially' bad for some reason (like craptastic PC and/or internet connection, doing nothing but grinding skills on new 'mechs, intentionally playing the game while hitting your head with a hammer) then you're correct. All it will require to get to higher tiers is simply play and perform well.

However, the key words of your statement are, "...if you aren't terrible..." which should probably be, "...if you can consistently perform well..."

That's the key.

At a minimum the Tiers might display a player's understanding of the game's mechanics and how to operate within them.

I certainly would not trust a Tier 4 or 5's explanation of gauss, convergence, and how to lead targets over that of a Tier 2 or 3 player's explanation.

The Tiers MIGHT display a player's understanding of the game's mechanics.

I'd trust the advice of a Tier 3 pilot from EmP or SJR over a Tier 1 pilot from an uncompetitive unit or solo player.

I bet it wouldn't be that difficult to grind to Tier 1 using only LRM hunchbacks. Getting to Tier 1 in no way certifies you as a good player, just not terrible.

[L3mming2]

The Atlas Overlord, on 09 October 2015 - 01:04 PM, said:

#rekt

not to be a douche about it but if i was let louse in t 4 i would have multiple mechs with even beter stats...

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

clownwarlord, on 07 October 2015 - 08:10 AM, said:

This is getting really old. Thread after thread about balancing and what is worse PGI's ability of vague nothingness.

What I mean is this:

May 2015 - mention of a re-balancing of every mech and aspect of the game from intel gathering to weapons.

July 2015 - Russ and NGNG mention the re-balancing in a town hall.

August 2015 - Asked Phil about the re-balancing and get "You guys are going to love it!"

September 2015 - some kind of re-balancing test server that still makes no since at what PGI was testing.

Current October 2015 - Nothing silent on all fronts and we are one patch down for the month leaving only 1 patch to go.

So yeah lack of information coupled with mech sales (for real money; Marauder, Warhammer, ...) what is going on? Is PGI even still working on this re-balancing that they talked about that any 75 ton should be able to compete with any other 75 tonner or 30 ton mech should be able to compete with any other 30 ton mech. Or did this all get filed away into a round filing bin?





Sadly though I doubt I will get any response from PGI or other facet with knowledgeable intel on the subject, but I sure hope I do.

I forsee a PM from Tina about this unconstructive topic

[MischiefSC]

Dimento Graven, on 09 October 2015 - 02:03 PM, said:

>>IF<< you've had some sort of circumstance where your performance has been 'artificially' bad for some reason (like craptastic PC and/or internet connection, doing nothing but grinding skills on new 'mechs, intentionally playing the game while hitting your head with a hammer) then you're correct. All it will require to get to higher tiers is simply play and perform well.

However, the key words of your statement are, "...if you aren't terrible..." which should probably be, "...if you can consistently perform well..."

That's the key.

At a minimum the Tiers might display a player's understanding of the game's mechanics and how to operate within them.

I certainly would not trust a Tier 4 or 5's explanation of gauss, convergence, and how to lead targets over that of a Tier 2 or 3 player's explanation.

I get what you're saying and to a degree I agree with you. However the Tier system is easy to game and is *not* representative directly of performance so I'm twitchy about letting it become a gauge for what someone does and doesn't know about the game.

For example someone in my unit pretty much plays exclusively in group queue and CW, but he plays with mostly random groups and levels mechs there so he's like T4 or T5 even though for performance he's more like a T3 to T2. Conversely there are some people who play terrible - killstealing, camping, sandbagging in the back and waiting for the end of the match to rush up and who regularly run off and hide/power down when the match doesn't look like it's going well. Their KDR is great - they are terrible players.

All niche stuff to be sure. Also how good someone plays individually isn't the same as their knowing how the game works and what works and what doesn't. That stuff gets played out most effectively in competitive play - at the top tiers in tournaments skill levels between players are so close that it magnifies the relevance of differences in equipment performance. It's the only way to consistently and effectively balance the player skill part of the equation and get a better, cleaner look at performance telemetry of mechs/weapons/etc.

I'd be lying if I said Tier ranking wasn't in some way reflective of a players ability to win matches, kill mechs and do damage. My concern is that you can do all of those and still play very, very poorly. Is that likely? No. Not 'typical'. I just would not agree that Tier should be taken as a direct representation of skill.

[Dimento Graven]

pwnface, on 09 October 2015 - 02:39 PM, said:

The Tiers MIGHT display a player's understanding of the game's mechanics.

I'd trust the advice of a Tier 3 pilot from EmP or SJR over a Tier 1 pilot from an uncompetitive unit or solo player.

Depending on what they expounding upon you might be right. I certainly won't take much stock in ANY player's advice on something they've no demonstrated skill it.

JUST BECAUSE you happen to be in certain guilds does not automagically imbue you with knowledge and skill on subjects you've little personal experience with.

Quote

I bet it wouldn't be that difficult to grind to Tier 1 using only LRM hunchbacks. Getting to Tier 1 in no way certifies you as a good player, just not terrible.

Getting to Tier 1 requires appropriate performance both in wins and losses to get there. I would argue it implies you're "good", but doesn't establish you as "great"...

[pwnface]

Dimento Graven, on 09 October 2015 - 02:52 PM, said:

Depending on what they expounding upon you might be right. I certainly won't take much stock in ANY player's advice on something they've no demonstrated skill it.

JUST BECAUSE you happen to be in certain guilds does not automagically imbue you with knowledge and skill on subjects you've little personal experience with.

I'm pretty sure groups like EmP and SJR will not let you in unless you are an elite player, so no being in the group doesn't imbue you with knowledge or skills but rather is a requirement.

Dimento Graven, on 09 October 2015 - 02:52 PM, said:

Getting to Tier 1 requires appropriate performance both in wins and losses to get there. I would argue it implies you're "good", but doesn't establish you as "great"...

I guess our definitions of a "good" player probably don't match up. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Edited by pwnface, 09 October 2015 - 02:56 PM.

[Dimento Graven]

MischiefSC, on 09 October 2015 - 02:49 PM, said:

I get what you're saying and to a degree I agree with you. However the Tier system is easy to game and is *not* representative directly of performance so I'm twitchy about letting it become a gauge for what someone does and doesn't know about the game.

I think we have to agree that getting to Tier 1 establishes that you have more than basic understanding of how the game works and how to play it.

Quote

For example someone in my unit pretty much plays exclusively in group queue and CW, but he plays with mostly random groups and levels mechs there so he's like T4 or T5 even though for performance he's more like a T3 to T2. Conversely there are some people who play terrible - killstealing, camping, sandbagging in the back and waiting for the end of the match to rush up and who regularly run off and hide/power down when the match doesn't look like it's going well. Their KDR is great - they are terrible players.

I have someone similar in my unit, they play well and typically perform great, but ended up being Tier 5 somehow, and we both agree, KDR doesn't really doesn't give the whole story about performance.

Quote

All niche stuff to be sure. Also how good someone plays individually isn't the same as their knowing how the game works and what works and what doesn't. That stuff gets played out most effectively in competitive play - at the top tiers in tournaments skill levels between players are so close that it magnifies the relevance of differences in equipment performance. It's the only way to consistently and effectively balance the player skill part of the equation and get a better, cleaner look at performance telemetry of mechs/weapons/etc.

I'd argue that the public queues are in fact the most basic form of competitive play though. If you can be successful there, as long as your not a flaming douche bag or intentionally ignorant, it wouldn't take that much to be successful in league play.

Quote

I'd be lying if I said Tier ranking wasn't in some way reflective of a players ability to win matches, kill mechs and do damage. My concern is that you can do all of those and still play very, very poorly. Is that likely? No. Not 'typical'. I just would not agree that Tier should be taken as a direct representation of skill.

We agree, it shouldn't be taken as the sole representation of skill, it more or less can be an initial starting point, something we can use as part of what we use to judge what someone says.

I will say however that it's more difficult to game the system "upward" than it is to game it "downward". To game "upward" you have to not lose, and not lose big, most of the time, and win at least enough to get a positive bump, most of the time.

Doing well 'intentionally' is actually a lot harder than doing badly intentionally.

pwnface, on 09 October 2015 - 02:56 PM, said:

...

I guess our definitions of a "good" player probably don't match up. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

Let's put it this way...

I've yet to meet a "bad" Tier 1 player.

[pwnface]

Dimento Graven, on 09 October 2015 - 03:02 PM, said:

Let's put it this way...

I've yet to meet a "bad" Tier 1 player.

Have you looked in the mirror yet? BURN!

JK, I actually have no idea how good or bad you are because I don't remember the last time I was in a match with you. I'll concede that I'd rather have a random, unknown T1 player than a random, unknown T4 player on my team. There is a positive correlation for Tier rating and "good"ness of a player, how strong of a correlation remains to be seen.

[Dimento Graven]

pwnface, on 09 October 2015 - 03:06 PM, said:

Have you looked in the mirror yet? BURN!

I wonder how many people will be posting that they're pissed you beat them to that...

Quote

JK, I actually have no idea how good or bad you are because I don't remember the last time I was in a match with you. I'll concede that I'd rather have a random, unknown T1 player than a random, unknown T4 player on my team. There is a positive correlation for Tier rating and "good"ness of a player, how strong of a correlation remains to be seen.

I totally agree, but now that it can be seen, I would imagine we'll have a lot more people trying to improve their ranking.

I would hazard to guess that eventually we'd be able to solidly rely on it meaning that they are, at a minimum, "good".

[Alex Morgaine]

oldradagast, on 08 October 2015 - 07:03 PM, said:

There's nothing tinfoil about it. I strongly suspect that what we saw on the PTS was EXACTLY what they intended to push into the live game... with the hilarious typos being fixed within a week or two.

Yeah, yeah - the White Knights and believers in corporate infallibility will prattle on about how &quot;PGI said that those numbers didn't mean anything.&quot; Yeah, they said that AFTER the fact - AFTER the lunacy on the server was thoroughly blasted by the public.

So, what were those numbers supposed to be? Why were the mechs so radically altered if &quot;those numbers didn't mean anything?&quot; Do they pay people to stuff random numbers in XML files that &quot;mean nothing?&quot; Or, do they have such bad control over their data that they have no idea what ends up in production?

The painful reality is that all those changes were made for a reason - somebody didn't just write all that up for fun - so I don't buy for a moment that &quot;it was all a mistake and the data on the PTS wasn't going to be anything like the final product... so, uh... tell us if info warfare works based on this horribly re-balanced game state.&quot; Yeah... no.

The way some of the quirks (gaming omni parts and lol turret enfarcer) I really, REALLY hope you are wrong, but fear you may have been right on the pts remarks. Cause, daaaaym them quirks were quirky.and bad.mostly bad.

[pwnface]

Dimento Graven, on 09 October 2015 - 03:10 PM, said:

I totally agree, but now that it can be seen, I would imagine we'll have a lot more people trying to improve their ranking.

I would hazard to guess that eventually we'd be able to solidly rely on it meaning that they are, at a minimum, "good".

Maybe. Then again there are a lot of excellent players who can't be bothered to play MWO outside of competitive private lobbies. I know a lot of players that should be solidly in Tier 1 skillwise that don't really care to grind out the matches to stroke their own epeen. I also know a few players, who actually care a lot though and are trying to grind it out for some reason that I can't understand.

[Alex Morgaine]

The Atlas Overlord, on 08 October 2015 - 08:05 PM, said:

P.S. Shouldn't you have your tier status displayed before you talk down about how much you know of &quot;comp teams&quot; and &quot;group play&quot;?

No no, tier does not equal skill, seen enough people post confusion showing good kdr our just being known as good mech jockeys in t4/5. Let's not fall into that trap.

[Deathlike]

Let us hope you reach Tier 3, so you may join the "less than underhive" show you how much you'll be "rewarded" with your LRMs.

Man... all the farming is Tier 4+5...

I guess I'd have to be there to see how easy it is.

[Mcgral18]

Deathlike, on 10 October 2015 - 01:01 PM, said:

Let us hope you reach Tier 3, so you may join the "less than underhive" show you how much you'll be "rewarded" with your LRMs.

Man... all the farming is Tier 4+5...

I guess I'd have to be there to see how easy it is.

He didn't even comment after I revealed my tier...

I guess there were too many tears.

[MischiefSC]

Mcgral18, on 10 October 2015 - 01:10 PM, said:

He didn't even comment after I revealed my tier...

I guess there were too many tears.

It's cool. Sometimes you need a punching bag to work out on. Helps keep you in fighting trim for the real match.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Mcgral18, on 10 October 2015 - 01:10 PM, said:

He didn't even comment after I revealed my tier...

I guess there were too many tears.

Congrats you finally got the courage to reveal it. *golf clap*

Sorry I didn't spend all night F5'ing on the forums....I was too busying getting more kills in my Atlas.

[Weeny Machine]

There needs to be fixed so many things...

1. Hitscan (lasers) vs velocity weapons
2. ECM
3. LRMs (in the absence of ECM...heck it is getting dumb that you can't step out of cover without seeing "Missiles Incomming")
4. Huge Alphas
5. Heavies which turn faster than ballerinas
6. Hitreg which is a joke for some weapon systems (too bad that 1/3 of your SRMs do not register, Mr. Oxide)
7. Brawl vs long ranged weapons

[Mcgral18]

The Atlas Overlord, on 10 October 2015 - 01:52 PM, said:

Congrats you finally got the courage to reveal it. *golf clap*

Sorry I didn't spend all night F5'ing on the forums....I was too busying getting more kills in my Atlas.

"Courage"
I'll go and hide it again. People get the wrong impression.

Nah, if you were actually doing that, you'd be Forum Warrior-ing during the 3 minute+queues between each drop.