145 replies to this topic

[Dimento Graven]

pwnface, on 08 October 2015 - 01:06 PM, said:

Now I know you are just trolling.

In the most recent CW event the top 2 IS and top 2 Clan teams were 12DG, NS, 228th, and MS respectively. Guess how many of these guys used LRMs. ZERO.

You are saying since you've seen clans use LRMs they are somehow not terrible? I've seen people run 9 flamer hunchbacks, it doesn't make it somehow good.

In CW beta 1 Kurita spanked the **** out of Marik and Davion. Know why? We got EVERYONE to stop bringing goddamn LRMs. We got Kurita pugs organized into a common teamspeak and shared GOOD builds and strategies. Marik and Davion continued to field LRMs because they couldn't accept the truth that LRMs are TERRIBLE for winning. Marik and Davion both resorted to "just don't queue up" strategies to try to stop us after weeks of getting crushed.

Oh go cry me a river. So you can't use computer guided weaponry to insta gib everyone you see.

It doesn't make them "bad" weapons.

The Clans do use LRMs in CW because the IS typically doesn't have a lot of viable CW ECM 'mechs available to shield them from target locks allowing Clans that much more efficiency with their missiles.

Sorry you didn't see it, but you're being an idiot if you think you're speaking for all those different teams and all their different CW groups. I've been in CW matches, RECENTLY, where 12 man Clan teams brought missiles, and yeah, we didn't instantly die due to the missiles, they did a WONDERFUL job of making positioning very difficult.

Quote

Let's forget about all of that for a minute though, the idea that CW is COMPETITIVE currently is ludicrous. There are almost no good teams that actively still play CW, clubbing pugs repeatedly gets boring after a few weeks. being able to pull 48-0 against bad players IS NOT COMPETITIVE.

Please stop with your delusions on gameplay balance and go LRM in solo queue more.

Goddamnit SOMEONE understands!

CW is ludicrous because everyone that went to join the Clans realized, but won't typically admit to, the fact that it's easier to win CW in Clan 'mechs.

That's why when we see these groups switch back to an IS faction, they do it for, at most a few weeks before going back to Clans, and their effect on the map while in the IS faction is relatively minor.

All the advantages of Clan 'mechs shine in CW when facing only IS 'mech opposition:
Smaller weapons
Lighter weapons
Smaller XL Engine
More durable XL engine
Longer weapon ranges
Higher damage weapons

These advantages result in Clan 'mechs that are typically FASTER, typically have BIGGER alpha, that can typically hit from LONGER ranges, all stacked in a 'mech that is absolutely MORE DURABLE than the IS equivalent.

The last Turkayyid event showed clans could do 10% to 20% less damage while killing 10% to 20% MORE 'mechs. That means the typical IS pilot has to do 10% to 20% more damage than the typical Clanner JUST to break even, let alone win.

What it boils down to is that mast IS pilots find CW more burdensome than fun when fighting Clanners and the IS just can't bring the numbers it needs.

[Spr1ggan]

I'd like to see SRMs be good again. Currently they are so pathetically **** that i'd rather play LRMs or MGs.

[pwnface]

Dimento Graven, on 08 October 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

Oh go cry me a river. So you can't use computer guided weaponry to insta gib everyone you see.

It doesn't make them "bad" weapons.

Dude, LRMs ARE BAD WEAPONS.

Stop being delusional, just because you can occasionally beat terrible teams in CW with them it doesn't make them any less bad.

Spr1ggan, on 08 October 2015 - 01:38 PM, said:

I'd like to see SRMs be good again. Currently they are so pathetically **** that i'd rather play LRMs or MGs.

I'd like to see SRMs buffed too, they are just too lackluster currently.

Edited by pwnface, 08 October 2015 - 01:48 PM.

[MischiefSC]

pwnface, on 08 October 2015 - 01:05 PM, said:

Now I know you are just trolling.

In the most recent CW event the top 2 IS and top 2 Clan teams were 12DG, NS, 228th, and MS respectively. Guess how many of these guys used LRMs. ZERO.

You are saying since you've seen clans use LRMs they are somehow not terrible? I've seen people run 9 flamer hunchbacks, it doesn't make it somehow good.

In CW beta 1 Kurita spanked the **** out of Marik and Davion. Know why? We got EVERYONE to stop bringing goddamn LRMs. We got Kurita pugs organized into a common teamspeak and shared GOOD builds and strategies. Marik and Davion continued to field LRMs because they couldn't accept the truth that LRMs are TERRIBLE for winning. Marik and Davion both resorted to "just don't queue up" strategies to try to stop us after weeks of getting crushed.

Let's forget about all of that for a minute though, the idea that CW is COMPETITIVE currently is ludicrous. There are almost no good teams that actively still play CW, clubbing pugs repeatedly gets boring after a few weeks. being able to pull 48-0 against bad players IS NOT COMPETITIVE.

Please stop with your delusions on gameplay balance and go LRM in solo queue more.

It's a little more complex than that. Neither faction really has active comp tier groups providing direction.

Added to that there is a minimal interest in comp tier tactics and coordination - there are still regular arguments about the usefulness of different loadouts and decks and tactics. You see a lot of pug queue stuff being run. Which is all okay; I pug in cw a lot (or have before I should say) and not everyone enjoys actual comp tier play, coordinated drop decks and bringing meta.

However there is a *lot* of resistance to even being honest about what does and does not work. LRMS are bad by comparison. They are inferior in cw to direct fire and direct fire decks. Anecdotal examples of times it has worked against other pug teams are trotted out and napkin math, etc. Same with a number of bad builds and bad tactics. Without the consistent presence of comp tier teams to drop WITH (not just against) those skills don't become part of the culture and tribal knowledge that makes otherwise scattered groups use consistent and optimized ideas.

There isn't an easy solution to that. Kurita had success because it had multiple groups of comp tier or near comp tier players who could group up and lead by example to teach their factions players. Without that you don't have and leadership by performance so it becomes more leadership by ego, which carries far more weight in teamspeak than it does in play.

Edited by MischiefSC, 08 October 2015 - 01:54 PM.

[pwnface]

MischiefSC, on 08 October 2015 - 01:51 PM, said:

There isn't an easy solution to that. Kurita had success because it had multiple groups of comp tier or near comp tier players who could group up and lead by example to teach their factions players. Without that you don't have and leadership by performance so it becomes more leadership by ego, which carries far more weight in teamspeak than it does in play.

I want very badly to name and shame certain people from Marik who started a war and then quit playing the game when things started falling apart.

Also...anyone remember this..

Edited by pwnface, 08 October 2015 - 01:54 PM.

[SplashDown]

all i see in OP's post is fail players unite and cry and blame the game ..it must be the games that broken..noway would the OP just be bad at it

Edited by SplashDown, 08 October 2015 - 01:59 PM.

[pwnface]

SplashDown, on 08 October 2015 - 01:58 PM, said:

all i see in OP's post is fail players unite and cry and blame the game ..it must be the games that broken..noway would the OP just be bad at it

The OP is literally just asking for updates on the balance changes that are supposedly in the pipeline. I don't see any "fail players unite and cry and blame the game". I think most people agree that gameplay balance can be improved still.

[Bracchus]

I haven't read all the posts in the thread so could be something that's already been posted.

The biggest problem in MWO at the moment in my opinion is the fact that we have mechs able to more or less rapid fire 50-60+ alphas. TTK is ridiculous low even if you are front loading your armor in a assault mech.
Solution: Instead of tweaking the damage of weapons one or two points here and there, lower the max heat from current 60 back down to the TT value of 30 and raise the dissipation of DHS to 2. All of a sudden we have to actually consider the risk of hurling one alpha and hopefully do a lot of damage against the fact that we will probably shut down in a bad spot. Back up weapons such as ML/SL will get more viable since we can't just alpha all the time, we also will have a use for chain fire... All in all, we get to fire more weapons but just not all of them at the same time as we do right now.

Some weapon systems would still need a overhaul, but its the only good start I can see. Just tweaking some dmg numbers and quirks will not get rid of the problem of assault melting alpha strikes, or rather the ability to throw them a hand full of times before hiding for 30 sec to cool down.

[Johnny Z]

How ever it all works out, the max size of alphas has to be limited, primarily. Not how many alphas can be done.

Thats the reality of online games today, is that some players will never miss when they want to hit, they will be 100% accurate when they need to be, or until banned. Closet hackers do not use hacks all the time, they use them to secure the win, then the hacks are off again. Only rage hackers use them all the time and they are banned fairly quick.

I play against fairly large groups of organized hackers regularily in another game. I know this because their accounts get banned by the thousands. Constantly. And they are good at it and their behavior is such that the hacks do not come on until they are in a losing situation and then only to secure the win unless they get really mad. lol. Recently a few got banned because someone upset them and they got literally 120+ kills in a single match for their top 3 players and nearly no deaths. Where as had they not been upset they would have had nearly nearly no discernable kdr difference.

This is added about hacking so players know the lay of the land when it comes to balance and complaints about balance and where those complaints may be coming from.

Hackers want 2 things, speed and high alphas. They can avoid being hit with easy mostly and can get the first shot in mostly. Slowness does not allow for them to use prior knowledge of opposing players to full advantage, to avoid getting into sight or to get the first shot in, therefore armor is not worth nearly as much as speed and a high alpha, cool down would also be a largely secondary concern.

TTK being longer is a legit players friend, also this game was meant to have longer TTK and is generally not as friendly to hackers as almost any other game by nature. Lets remember that and hope for max alphas to somehow be limited.

Max Alpha being limited by heat or a reactor pool has been brought up many times. So far it has been ghost heat that has been the limiting factor, which got alot of trolling. A good max alpha that effects both techs equally would be a great place to start for balancing.

It is my guess, totally a guess, that the big rebalancing will have some kind of limit on alphas.

How big the max alpha should be in relation to mech weight/ engine size and other details are the big questions I think.

Edited by Johnny Z, 08 October 2015 - 03:16 PM.

[DAYLEET]

FupDup, on 07 October 2015 - 08:12 AM, said:

I just hope that nearly all of the quirks we saw in the previous PTS session are wiped clean. They were so horribly borked on nearly everything, and not to mention extremely homogeneous (every single mech in the game had sensor, durability, and mobility quirks. EVERY SINGLE ONE OF THEM).

I dont know if that was in the test server but i really like the idea that light mech and to an extent meds would disappear faster from radar when our of sight. So as to not require radar derp. So it's all the same sensor quirk but it made a lot more sense than faster weapon or more phantom armor.

Edited by DAYLEET, 08 October 2015 - 02:36 PM.

[MischiefSC]

pwnface, on 08 October 2015 - 01:53 PM, said:

I want very badly to name and shame certain people from Marik who started a war and then quit playing the game when things started falling apart.

Also...anyone remember this..

I know a few people involved in that. It was never about losing; they lost plenty before that. It was something of a Marik Civil War. A big internal fight over who Marik was going to fight - Davion and Steiner only, Clans only, or run it on the fly. Apparently it got bitter, nasty and personal and some units and friendships imploded and the faction fell apart. Sad stuff really, unfortunate. The game played better with an active Marik. Just that all the southern houses had/have membership who refuse to fight Clans (why they went southern house) and people who only want to play out grudges from MPBT from a decade ago and such.

It's a bit strange sometimes. People who don't want to play the game as it is but want it to be some proxy for this bad thing that happened to them in band camp or some ****.

The biggest issue with any multi-player game isn't balance - it's that most players are total ******* idiots.

Edited by MischiefSC, 08 October 2015 - 05:43 PM.

[Dino Banino]

Just refuse paying money to the game. That is the best way to show you want change.

Once I feel I'm satisfied with the balancing PGI has done, then I'll open my wallet.

Until then, they aren't getting a dollar from me.

[Y E O N N E]

pwnface, on 08 October 2015 - 02:01 PM, said:

The OP is literally just asking for updates on the balance changes that are supposedly in the pipeline. I don't see any "fail players unite and cry and blame the game". I think most people agree that gameplay balance can be improved still.

Reading is OP...

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Deathlike, on 07 October 2015 - 07:34 PM, said:

Just because LRMs are used, it doesn't mean they are universally useful like direct fire.

^^ funny myth here...

LRMs are actually MORE useful than direct fire.... as long as a team mate is smart enough to lock the guy they're already fighting.

I can't count the number of times I've stood in the middle of the team pack, or right behind the firing line and supplemented fire over the guys holding the line...

Or assisted scouts 800 meters away where I would have been able to do absolutely nothing with direct fire weapons.

Just b/c the "good" players are generally too stubborn to use teamwork and take advantage of them doesn't suddenly remove the advantages LRMs brings a team.... it just means they're choosing to ignore them.

[oldradagast]

Ronyn, on 07 October 2015 - 08:30 AM, said:

*Puts on tinfoil hat* /em hates self a little bit.....


What if the reason they are so silent is because what we saw was what they had intended for the entire thing and they are in the process of figuring something out that won't make the player base go nuts like they did last month?

What if they got nothing, and are swamped with trying to figure balancing out in a way that won't piss off their customers, but lack the experience to do so, so they are in 'hush hush' panic mode and pushing out sales before people realize what's behind the curtain?

*Takes off tinfoil hat*

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 "PGI said that those numbers didn't mean anything." 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 "those numbers didn't mean anything?" Do they pay people to stuff random numbers in XML files that "mean nothing?" 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 "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." Yeah... no.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Archangel Dino, on 08 October 2015 - 06:18 PM, said:

Just refuse paying money to the game. That is the best way to show you want change.

Once I feel I'm satisfied with the balancing PGI has done, then I'll open my wallet.

Until then, they aren't getting a dollar from me.

Same here...

If the rebalance:

1)Slows down combat
2)Lengthens time to be killed for heavies and assaults (Armor is supposed to matter right)
3)Reformat lights and fast mediums to the function of reporting enemy locations, target locking, and low damage harassment as opposed to their current "Effectively an assault since tiny hitboxes, speed, and ability to control the range of engagement are currently WAY more useful than armor".... and then rewards them accordingly and appropriately
4)Steers combat towards sustained fire and aiming over time with multiple weapon systeams at different ranges instead of "only use the tactic that benefits the very limited and specific niche situation that this min/maxed load out can function in"
5)Reduces acceleration and deceleration (and maybe even top speeds) to combat the "poke / alpha / get safely back into cover without risk or a need to plan my attacks more than 3 seconds ahead of time"
6)Gives clan mechs a trade off for literally everythng being better
7)Adds in all the missing weapons IS doesn't have for no reason at all
8)Redo skills to for a little "RPG" flavor / pilot customization if you will

Then I'll start buying premium time monthly (and maybe even mech packs on the regular depending on just how much work they put into reversing all the damage done with clan release, consumables, power creep, and speed creep) as well as supporting them mentally, and even trying to actively recruit players.

If they instead continue catering to the "gotta go fast" and meta lovers... well I'll just continue giving my money to other games (like the battle tech kickstarter) and watch my resentment grow and fester all the while complaining about it to people that I would otherwise love to bring to the game.

Ball's in your court PGI.

Edited by The Atlas Overlord, 08 October 2015 - 07:35 PM.

[MischiefSC]

The Atlas Overlord, on 08 October 2015 - 06:55 PM, said:

^^ funny myth here...

LRMs are actually MORE useful than direct fire.... as long as a team mate is smart enough to lock the guy they're already fighting.

I can't count the number of times I've stood in the middle of the team pack, or right behind the firing line and supplemented fire over the guys holding the line...

Or assisted scouts 800 meters away where I would have been able to do absolutely nothing with direct fire weapons.

Just b/c the "good" players are generally too stubborn to use teamwork and take advantage of them doesn't suddenly remove the advantages LRMs brings a team.... it just means they're choosing to ignore them.

Thank you for being the voice of all the people who aggressively and relentlessly cling to bad ideas and effectively ensure that some sides are always going to lose.

If you think this is actually true, please take a 'great LRM group' and go stomp people in MRBC or any league or any challenge or any contest. Even once.

Comp players are the ones who use teamwork and would run flamers and MGs exclusively if that's what won. They can, will and do take whatever wins. The idea that LRMs would dominate 'if people just used them right' is part of the delusion that keeps people using bad mechs and builds, losing and getting stomped brutally and consistently in group queue and CW and then blaming whatever else for that.

The myth is that LRMs are good. If they are, prove it. Show it, in game, in practice, against comp tier teams and players. Do it, do it consistently and show video. It's never happened and it never will happen because it is absolutely false and has been proven so time and time and time again.

You go ahead and split your team up, make several members of your team spend tonnage that doesn't do damage and requires them to expose themselves solo on in small groups to the focused fire of 12 people who are religiously under ECM and AMS. Then watch them obliterate your spotters and go point blank and mock you in chat while they farm you for damage before blowing you away.

LRMs work against bad players. Anyone good enough to use effective cover, ECM and appropriate amounts of AMS and actively suppress spotters demolishes LRMs universally and without any exceptions.

Seriously. Please. For the love of god. All the people who say LRMs are good, get a team together and actually play against comp tier players. Show everyone how it's done. Then when you've been humiliated enough we can have an actual useful, serious, productive conversation about the balance of LRMs.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

MischiefSC, on 08 October 2015 - 07:09 PM, said:

The idea that LRMs would dominate 'if people just used them right'

Captain... our scanners are picking up a man of straw.

MischiefSC, on 08 October 2015 - 07:09 PM, said:

The fact is that LRMs are good, at what they're supposed to be good for.

I fixed that for you.

MischiefSC, on 08 October 2015 - 07:09 PM, said:

You go ahead and split your team up, make several members of your team spend tonnage that doesn't do damage and requires them to expose themselves solo on in small groups to the focused fire of 12 people who are religiously under ECM and AMS. Then watch them obliterate your spotters and go point blank and mock you in chat while they farm you for damage before blowing you away.

Captain, more men of straw are arriving to re-enforce the previously detected one.

MischiefSC, on 08 October 2015 - 07:09 PM, said:

Seriously. Please. For the love of god. All the people who say LRMs are good, get a team together and actually play against comp tier players. Show everyone how it's done. Then when you've been humiliated enough we can have an actual useful, serious, productive conversation about the balance of LRMs.

I have no interest in attempting to break your delusion. If you choose to stay stubborn and ignorant, nothing I can say or provide will change your mind.

Keep not using LRMs, I don't care.

But that doesn't mean I won't stop doing what I can to stem the tide of mis-information and bias you're trying to spread.

Edited by The Atlas Overlord, 08 October 2015 - 07:57 PM.

[MischiefSC]

The Atlas Overlord, on 08 October 2015 - 07:46 PM, said:

Captain... our scanners are picking up a man of straw.



I fixed that for you.



Captain, more men of straw are arriving to re-enforce the previously detected one.



I have no interest in attempting to break your delusion. If you choose to stay stubborn and ignorant, nothing I can say or provide will change your mind.

Keep not using LRMs, I don't care.

So you try and allude to a strawman, but offer nothing. Absolutely nothing of any substance. Any at all.

This is really, really simple -

Go play at a competitive level against competitive level players and use LRMs.

Win. Consistently. Even 50%.

You won't. Why? Because you are demonstratively wrong. The strawman is this idea that nobody else 'knows what they are good for' and just doesn't use LRMs 'because they are stubborn'.

No, LRMs have been gone over time and again by comp teams and comp players to see if they can be effectively used to an advantage.

They can't, because they are bad. If 'how they are meant to be used' is 'by people who aren't any good at direct fire and only play against bads' okay, I guess that's correct.

Because, again, to be clear, that's all they're good for.

If your are trying to assert that LRMs are good for more than that then go do it. Prove it. Show it. Demonstrate it. Prove everyone else wrong. I would *love* to have more viable weapons and options.

The biggest obstacle to actual useful balance though is this sort of crap. What does and does not work, what is and is not effective has been tested and demonstrated in practice again and again and again. I find a whole ton of the comp tier players to be absolute unmitigated ********. I find expressions of elitism absolutely toxic to a functioning community for games and the like.

That does not, however, change reality. The reality is that LRMs are bad by comparison. This isn't an assumption, it's not a hypothesis. It's been tested and demonstrated. You want to contest that, go prove it. Demonstrate it at a competitive level against competitive players.

Which, obviously, you won't. Because, bluntly, you're wrong. If you're not, then show it. Open invitation to everyone who says LRMs are not bad. Go play them in competitive play and win. It's really that simple.

Edited by MischiefSC, 08 October 2015 - 08:02 PM.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

MischiefSC, on 08 October 2015 - 08:01 PM, said:

So you try and allude to a strawman, but offer nothing.

I'm sorry you refuse to read.

MischiefSC, on 08 October 2015 - 08:01 PM, said:

Just more bias and blustering

We get it, you believe what you believe.

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

Edited by The Atlas Overlord, 08 October 2015 - 08:12 PM.