367 replies to this topic

[Davers]

Torric, on 22 October 2015 - 09:19 AM, said:

So what you are saying is... if you want to play in the group queue as a small, possibly only 2-man group, you HAVE to take heavy heavies or assaults? You HAVE to, and if you don't, getting stomped is your own fault?

Can you not possibly see something wrong with this?


Oh, and

@Mystere: so you really do know about the existence of that MultiQuote Button

In an ideal world 2 Locusts would be just as useful as 2 Stormcrows, or Timberwolves, or Dire Wolves. Maybe not pure damage-wise, but they would add something to the match that the other mechs could not.

This is not an ideal world. Blame Battletech first, where bigger is better. Then blame PGI for failing to create real role warfare/balance.

But don't blame me for understanding how the tonnage system is supposed to work. If 6 groups of players all take Locusts (240 tons) and are matches with a 12 man at 600 tons, or another 6 group team of 1200 tons it's no one's fault but their own.

[Leggin Ho]

Yeah, now you can see a 12 BJ-1X 12 man... and you will...lol

[C E Dwyer]

Mystere, on 22 October 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:

Class caps. Weight caps. Now we're going for speed caps?

This is ******* hilarious! Why not just, as I said earlier:



But I bet, people will still complain about being stomped!

Just ******* look in the mirror!

about this time slow hand claps might be best..

[Fire for Effect]

Davers, on 22 October 2015 - 04:33 PM, said:

In an ideal world 2 Locusts would be just as useful as 2 Stormcrows, or Timberwolves, or Dire Wolves.

Nope these are not equally useful never were and never will be. Was also not the case in the original BT.

Again PGI and some people simply fail to grasp that trying to base balance on weight is simply nonsense and can NEVER work.
Weight is fixed, you cannot change it and it is completely independent from loadout.

Of course a spider is equal to an Arctic Cheater (yes I spelled it like that on purpose)
an Orion is equal to a Mad Cat
a Wolverine 7D (strong contender for the most worthless mech in MWO) equal to a Stormcrow...

You are seeing something lacking on the steep path of weight balancing? such as balance?
So instead of forcing a Mad Cat to be as clunky as an Orion DECOUPLE IT.

And dont balance mechs, BALANCE TEAMS. It is completely unimportant if one team has an Über-mech (yes the original of uber is Über) then the rest of the team can take correspondingly less good mechs or maybe the pilot is the totally superior mech is really bad correspondingly lowering the BV point sum for one side, resulting is EQUAL TEAMS.
You want a mad cat no problem takes up a good chunk of your allowed BV...

Stop limiting players choices.

Not tonnage limits, BV limits is the right avenue to take.
Decouple weight from the MM decision, base MM on BV!

Then these absurd weapon "balancing" tries and nonsense quirking runs are not necessary anymore.
If you find an offending thing simply give some part of BV a nice negative chunk of extra points, problem solved;
Gauss is powerful... so instead of doing an absurd annoying totally unnecessary shooting weapon loading mechanism (maybe next time try something like: "you have to press eleven keys at the same time to be able to shoot it") simply increase its BV.
Flamers are junk? No problem BV for flamers is lowered even more...
LRM quite useless no problem lower BV oh all of a sudden everyone uses LRM then a tad more BV seems ok now
people WILL find out what is most effective pretty quick in 12 men group play so finally look at what people are using in group play...

you have die hard battletech fans who "battletech" for longer than many of PGIs employees are even living so maybe hear what they are saying for THREE years now... instead 100 something chassis are going to be reworked every few months...

For more than 3 in words THREE years now people keep telling you use BV and not weight. All tries of weight balanced MM have failed more or less miserably (see above wolverine7D = stormcrow? are you earnest?) , time to use finally the right path and decouple weight and combat potential and use a number COMPLETELY seperate from the mechs weight as basis for MM.

If one side has less weight or BV and the MM cannot find a good match simply give the side either a few free respawns in a fixed "PGI" chassis without announcing it to the people in the game (first few that get killed may come back) or give those that have lower sum of all team mates Mech BV times pilot rating special one shot module or abilities such as:

-tanks (your own pet tank...)
-elementals
- one Satellite coverage for a few seconds
- free seismic for all mechs of the side with a much much lower BV
- increase the heat reduction rate of all Heat sinks by 1%
- give all of the lower BV side a free cool shot
- an Infantry battalion that digs in and starts shooting at enemy mechs
- scatter mines with fried foe detection or give each in the lower BV team one free mine module to be deployed where he wishes.
- offer an Ammo recharge truck and a coolent truck for the lower point side only.

just grab "tactical operations" and finally READ IT there are dozens of ideas in it, that you could use to make the lower "BV times pilot rating" side closer to the higher value of the opposite team instead of tweaking k n o bs (edit: why is k n o b s being filtered out?) and buttons that simply will not effect what you try to gain.


Also it seems that whoever decided that last group tonnage limit of 600t is severely mathematically challenged, so 12 men groups cannot even take close to the average tonnage of all possible weights. Has anyone at PGI even tried if it is possible to make anything resembling a 12 men team with these absurdly low values?
So one 12 men vs 6 x 2 men can now result in 600t vs 1200t....


Maybe we should send em a calculator or maybe better an abacus.

Edited by Fire for Effect, 22 October 2015 - 05:54 PM.

[Fire for Effect]

Mystere, on 22 October 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:

But I bet, people will still complain about being stomped!

I just cite myself:

http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4668200

[Mystere]

Stefka Kerensky, on 22 October 2015 - 12:52 PM, said:

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

not agree with tonnage system, but at least now there is a serious change for small groups

For instance 3 man group, now 2 dire+1timber possible

There is one thing I still do not get. Why can't a 12-man run with 12 locusts (or any light for that matter) if they want to? And yet a Murder of Crows is allowed?

Insane!

Edited by Mystere, 22 October 2015 - 06:32 PM.

[MischiefSC]

So the only thing a BV would do is min/max the meta even more. You'd just have the best meta for the BV. That's it. It wouldn't 'balance' anything, in any way shape or form. It would just mean there was absolutely no reason to ever take inferior stuff, ever.

Balance means things have value, not that cheap stuff is cheap. That's not balance. That's throwing 80% of the games content out.

Look. This isn't each player building a lance/company/whatever of stuff to play. This isn't TT. It doesn't play like TT. I love TT BT and still play it with friends. This isn't that game though and can't be balanced the same.

This is a FPS. You are in 1 mech and fighting in a 12 v 12 moba FPS. You do not have a piloting and gunnery skill determined by a die roll. Your hits and misses are not determined by 2d6 with modifiers.

BV isn't useful. I wish it was - I wish there was some magic bullet to handle balance.

The reality is though that some players are better than others. In environments like the group queue where there are fewer players in the queue there is no way to effectively limit the inevitable interaction between good players and average or bad players. Trying to pre-gimp everyone in a group above 4 under the auspice that they're probably good (because, apparently, only good players have more than 3 friends around at any given time) just forces everyone playing with a group bigger than 4 to roll full meta.

I get that someone had an anecdotal evening that didn't look like that. It's all I've seen every time I've played, enough that I've put MW:O aside for now. Rebel Galaxy is pretty awesome and perfectly entertaining.

An approach of 'pre-nerf groups because the pug with friends crowd gets smashed by anyone who's half way trying' isn't going to fix anything.

[STEF_]

MischiefSC, on 22 October 2015 - 06:56 PM, said:

The reality is though that some players are better than others. In environments like the group queue where there are fewer players in the queue there is no way to effectively limit the inevitable interaction between good players and average or bad players.

Which is very similar to TT.

[MischiefSC]

Stefka Kerensky, on 22 October 2015 - 11:20 PM, said:

Which is very similar to TT.

Sorta. TT isn't the best comparison because as a given rule people playing a TT game are actually out to see everyone have fun. They behave like mature, responsible adults to some greater or lesser degree. It would never have even come up that anyone I played with wanted to gimp the other players by BV or other limitations because they were better at the game. You just played to get better, paid attention to what they did that won, and tried to pick those skills up yourself.

Now, in a campaign run by the GM you had artificial limitations to help the players win. It was essentially PvE and the GM was responsible for scaling battles up and down in challenge to be fun for the group of players.

For PvP though, the moment you decided to play against other people you accepted that they might be better than you. If someone won all the time you didn't ask that he get less BV - you just paid attention to what he did and tried to learn those skills yourself, so you became better. Generally the good players were happy to help everyone else improve.

Meh. I'm all for the pug queue. It's what it's there for. Group queue though is, well, for groups. Trying to turn it into pug-with-friends queue is.... well, as terrible an idea as this is already.

[Davers]

Fire for Effect, on 22 October 2015 - 05:51 PM, said:

Nope these are not equally useful never were and never will be. Was also not the case in the original BT.

Again PGI and some people simply fail to grasp that trying to base balance on weight is simply nonsense and can NEVER work.
Weight is fixed, you cannot change it and it is completely independent from loadout.

Of course a spider is equal to an Arctic Cheater (yes I spelled it like that on purpose)
an Orion is equal to a Mad Cat
a Wolverine 7D (strong contender for the most worthless mech in MWO) equal to a Stormcrow...

You are seeing something lacking on the steep path of weight balancing? such as balance?
So instead of forcing a Mad Cat to be as clunky as an Orion DECOUPLE IT.

And dont balance mechs, BALANCE TEAMS. It is completely unimportant if one team has an Über-mech (yes the original of uber is Über) then the rest of the team can take correspondingly less good mechs or maybe the pilot is the totally superior mech is really bad correspondingly lowering the BV point sum for one side, resulting is EQUAL TEAMS.
You want a mad cat no problem takes up a good chunk of your allowed BV...

Stop limiting players choices.

Not tonnage limits, BV limits is the right avenue to take.
Decouple weight from the MM decision, base MM on BV!

Then these absurd weapon "balancing" tries and nonsense quirking runs are not necessary anymore.
If you find an offending thing simply give some part of BV a nice negative chunk of extra points, problem solved;
Gauss is powerful... so instead of doing an absurd annoying totally unnecessary shooting weapon loading mechanism (maybe next time try something like: "you have to press eleven keys at the same time to be able to shoot it") simply increase its BV.
Flamers are junk? No problem BV for flamers is lowered even more...
LRM quite useless no problem lower BV oh all of a sudden everyone uses LRM then a tad more BV seems ok now
people WILL find out what is most effective pretty quick in 12 men group play so finally look at what people are using in group play...

you have die hard battletech fans who "battletech" for longer than many of PGIs employees are even living so maybe hear what they are saying for THREE years now... instead 100 something chassis are going to be reworked every few months...

For more than 3 in words THREE years now people keep telling you use BV and not weight. All tries of weight balanced MM have failed more or less miserably (see above wolverine7D = stormcrow? are you earnest?) , time to use finally the right path and decouple weight and combat potential and use a number COMPLETELY seperate from the mechs weight as basis for MM.

If one side has less weight or BV and the MM cannot find a good match simply give the side either a few free respawns in a fixed "PGI" chassis without announcing it to the people in the game (first few that get killed may come back) or give those that have lower sum of all team mates Mech BV times pilot rating special one shot module or abilities such as:

-tanks (your own pet tank...)
-elementals
- one Satellite coverage for a few seconds
- free seismic for all mechs of the side with a much much lower BV
- increase the heat reduction rate of all Heat sinks by 1%
- give all of the lower BV side a free cool shot
- an Infantry battalion that digs in and starts shooting at enemy mechs
- scatter mines with fried foe detection or give each in the lower BV team one free mine module to be deployed where he wishes.
- offer an Ammo recharge truck and a coolent truck for the lower point side only.

just grab "tactical operations" and finally READ IT there are dozens of ideas in it, that you could use to make the lower "BV times pilot rating" side closer to the higher value of the opposite team instead of tweaking k n o bs (edit: why is k n o b s being filtered out?) and buttons that simply will not effect what you try to gain.


Also it seems that whoever decided that last group tonnage limit of 600t is severely mathematically challenged, so 12 men groups cannot even take close to the average tonnage of all possible weights. Has anyone at PGI even tried if it is possible to make anything resembling a 12 men team with these absurdly low values?
So one 12 men vs 6 x 2 men can now result in 600t vs 1200t....


Maybe we should send em a calculator or maybe better an abacus.

While you do make some points, I do disagree with your justification for a BV system. BV doesn't replace actual mech and weapon balance. It is not ok to just say, "Hey Flamers don't really work, but it's cool cuz we lowered their BV cost", "LRMs are complete rubbish at competitive levels? With the new BV cost, working as intended".

If mechs like the Locust are not worth taking, then they should never have been made. PGI should have never wasted the time designing them, and players should be told to stop asking for mechs like them.

While AI units and stuff are all really cool, I would like to have more of a balanced game soon, rather than years from now when they finish the single player stuff. Isn't that one of the reasons flamers are so bad now, because eventually they will be anti-infantry weapons at some future date?

Based on your BV system there is never a need for anyone to use less than the 'best' mechs. At worst they will be matched against the same, at best they will face several inferior mechs on the opposing team.

[Shae Starfyre]

I thought about this some more, and I have to admit that there is some merit to the competitive notion that if you drop in a group queue, bring your A-Game.

After-all, you are signing up for a competitive match, not some casual drop.

Although, there is something lacking in that 2 people should be able to drop casually and have fun which leads back to the argument why not 2's in public queue?

I dunno, so back and forth on the issue.

[TWIAFU]

Mystere, on 21 October 2015 - 07:36 AM, said:

CW is proof that facing 12 Firestarters (or any 12 lights for that matter) is not an issue for a team that can shoot and does not panic. Even PUG teams were able to deal with them.

Hehe, I was in a group (4 of us) match last night, HPG, I rounded a corner to look for contacts and, well, found some....

Was a swarm of lights. 6-8 of them. Say the least I was a bit surprised. Profanity went out over TS, UAV went up, did a 180' and made it only a few steps before I was slag. Profanity again, then laughter....

Epic battle went on. Was touch and go right down to the end!

Even though we lost, and I shamefully died first, was one of the best fights the side I was on had all night. No rolls, just a good old knock down drag out fight to the bitter end.

[zudukai]

not having read the 16 pages, i do not see a problem here.

why is everyone having such a hard time adapting and countering?
fresh ideas must be too much work.

[TWIAFU]

Torric, on 22 October 2015 - 09:19 AM, said:

So what you are saying is... if you want to play in the group queue as a small, possibly only 2-man group, you HAVE to take heavy heavies or assaults? You HAVE to, and if you don't, getting stomped is your own fault?

Can you not possibly see something wrong with this?


Oh, and

@Mystere: so you really do know about the existence of that MultiQuote Button

Alternatively, you could use Group Chat/Faction Chat to, I dunno, talk to the other 10 players in your group? Make some adjustments? Maybe use VOIP?

Hell, you do not even have to talk to strangers - and BTW, when your parents told you not to, they did not mean forever!

Can just see what others are dropping in and compliment that?

Or, if you do not like teamwork outside your duo group, just take mechs that compliment each other.

There are few things you HAVE to do in group queue, they are;

1. Be in a group.
2. Pick a mech.
3. Work as part of a 12 person team.

Does not matter if you are a 2 or 12man team. If you do not work as a team you get rolled.

Loading screen is right, Teamwork = Victory.

[Kira Onime]

zudukai, on 23 October 2015 - 09:19 AM, said:

why is everyone having such a hard time adapting and countering?
fresh ideas must be too much work.

Go read the 16 pages, you're clearly out of the loop.

[TWIAFU]

Aphoticus, on 23 October 2015 - 09:13 AM, said:

Although, there is something lacking in that 2 people should be able to drop casually and have fun which leads back to the argument why not 2's in public queue?

Because solo players would complain about getting rolled/farmed by the evil 2man.

[Mystere]

TWIAFU, on 23 October 2015 - 09:16 AM, said:

Hehe, I was in a group (4 of us) match last night, HPG, I rounded a corner to look for contacts and, well, found some....

Was a swarm of lights. 6-8 of them. Say the least I was a bit surprised. Profanity went out over TS, UAV went up, did a 180' and made it only a few steps before I was slag. Profanity again, then laughter....

Epic battle went on. Was touch and go right down to the end!

Even though we lost, and I shamefully died first, was one of the best fights the side I was on had all night. No rolls, just a good old knock down drag out fight to the bitter end.

And which is why I always thought 3/3/3/3 was nothing but an abomination. It completely eliminated those formations that made you go "WTF?" and still have a blast at the same time.

[Dimento Graven]

TWIAFU, on 23 October 2015 - 09:27 AM, said:

Because solo players would complain about getting rolled/farmed by the evil 2man.

TWO MANS ATE MY BABY!!!

[TWIAFU]

Mystere, on 22 October 2015 - 06:30 PM, said:

There is one thing I still do not get. Why can't a 12-man run with 12 locusts (or any light for that matter) if they want to? And yet a Murder of Crows is allowed?

Insane!

I want to farm pugs in a 12man premade all Urbie drop!

Nerf 12mans!

Nerf Urbies!

Dimento Graven, on 23 October 2015 - 09:28 AM, said:

TWO MANS ATE MY BABY!!!

Two men ate your what??!?!?!?

[zudukai]

Kira Onime, on 23 October 2015 - 09:26 AM, said:

Go read the 16 pages, you're clearly out of the loop.

meaning the suggestions are better then the free tonnage? my post may have not been the clearest,

paraphrase: "why is free tonnage so bad?"

the way i see it, the 12 crow deck directly counters the min/max 8 cheeta +4 dire deck, which counters the 12 hellbringer/thunderbolt deck, and so on.