24 replies to this topic

[DirePlayer]

It really does seem to be down to damage, when you do 1300+ damage with 3 or 4 kills you can see the bar move. Helped of course by a team win.

[Hawk_eye]

Dee Eight, on 09 February 2016 - 10:21 AM, said:

Oh that's nothing... tens of thousands of games of mechwarrior 1-4, mechcommander, both battletech computer games, and easily hundreds of the classic cardboard battletech miniatures, where playing a LANCE vs LANCE battle was a six hour affair. Oh and the wizkids mechwarrior clix game.

I started playing the TT back in the mid-80 so yeah, I know how long a game took back then (hell, we once did an IS battalion vs. a Clan trinary, 3 vs. 3 players - it took _ages_ ) and I played the crap out of Mechwarrior 1 to 3 (never really liked 4) and the two MechCommander, but 1100 matches in just over a month _is_ a bit much, even for me

Come to think about it, I _seem_ to remember sitting in front of that screen all night, blasting Jade Falcons to smithereens until the sun rose and I had to go to work.
Sure could´t do this nowadays anymore

Edited by Antecursor Venatus, 09 February 2016 - 11:04 AM.

[Dee Eight]

Well when you keep getting teams that all die in 5 mins... its not that much time to hit a lot of matches per day. At least I don't experience mechwarrior tetris dreams.

Another thing I see often is people in the big mechs not thinkin about the pitch limits... when they try and crest a hill in caustic valley or alpine peaks to shoot at someone just below the crest. Also the number of players who take I.S. Trial LRM boats and then try and shoot pointblank...

Anyway... five losses in a row from bad teams and I'm back to the basement.... But in the past 36 hours overall I've raised my kills/death ratio from 0.39 to 0.41, had 32 wins and 33 losses and I'm up to 1165 total games (with 521 wins) so my win percentage has gone up also very slightly.

Some screenshots... oh two wins back to back this morning were conquer formats where we SWEPT the game (like 750 points vs 300ish) and they were just "no change" to PSR... seriously ? Why doesn't the PSR actually apply different formulas to the different game formats ?!

http://yoda.densan.c...rior/000065.jpg

http://yoda.densan.c...rior/000066.jpg

http://yoda.densan.c...rior/000067.jpg

http://yoda.densan.c...rior/000068.jpg

Edited by Dee Eight, 09 February 2016 - 04:22 PM.

[Hawk_eye]

Well, from what I can see on your screenshots, your PSR is kinda working as intended.

In the first match, your team lost, but you got a quite good game-score, thus your PSR didn´t go down.
In the second match your team won, but you hardly did any damage (I guess you were busy capping), so your game-score was crap and you didn´t get an up on your PSR.

You can argue that capping in assault/conquest should be rewarded more (and I´d wholeheartedly agree. It´s completely retar.ded to create a game-mode that tells you to cap something and then doesn´t reward you, when you do so), but the _reasons_ why you didn´t go up in your PSR in those matches are quite clear.

That´s one of the reasons why conquest and assault are usually played as just another skirmish variant. If you speed-cap in assault and win, you get much less rewards than if you "murderball" and lose but kill half the enemy team.
As I said, complete retar.ded.


P.s.: Both game modes, assault and conquest, are currently being re-worked in both, how the game-mode itself works as well as how the modes are rewarded, so there is light at the end of the tunnel

P.p.s.: retar.ded is censored? Seriously?

[Khosumi]

Just dropping this here. http://mwomercs.com/...-tiers-and-psr/