Jump to content

How To Make Every Mech Chassis Worthwhile?


6 replies to this topic

#1 102_devill

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 140 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 02:15 AM

Hi PG,

Instead of trying to balance different mechs ad nauseam and make every mech feel the same in the end, I would like to propose a system which would make it worthwhile for players to use every mech they own, no matter how under-performing it is.

Firstly, why is a mech chassis under-performing?

Could be due to following reasons (maybe I forgot something):

1. Not able to have an optimal META build (for ex. not a laser vomit since it has too few energy hardpoints)

2. hardpoints are located unfavorably compared to other mechs (for ex. main hardpoints are mounted low)

3. unfavorable geometry of the mech (for ex. CT particularly sticking out)

Keep in mind that whatever way you try to balance out these mechs, points 2 and 3 cannot be changed; they are simply fixed by the look of the mech. Balancing out point 1, depends on the current state of different weapons and their mechanics, so it always has an impact on more that one mech chassis. This point may be offset by the quirks (currently) or the new skill tree (coming soon but basically the same thing) but not by that much. However much you quirk a certain mech, if its design is too limited by the other points, it will just never be useful to take into a match after you have elited it.

Moreover, there is always a tendency that people will take the best mechs to a faction or a random match, simply to be competitive with the others. This heavily reduces variety. Some mech simply cannot be seen in matches (particularly faction) yet they are iconic to a specific faction. An example would be the Dragon and Kurita. But there are many more examples.

So, how could we solve this problem? Here is a suggestion:

Give every mech chassis a positive or a negative bonus for XP, GXP and C-Bill earning in a match, based on how much this particular chassis is currently played by the MWO population.

This system has been working extremely well in a very old online flight sim Warbirds. In that game, everyone wanted to fly a Focke-Wolf 190, but if many pilots were using it, the experience gain (or whatever it was back then) for everyone had a lower multiplier. This gain multiplier allowed you to progress up the ladder (because that was the main objective) faster or slower.

So, for example, for each kill when flying a FW190 you would get more reward if fewer people were flying it. If a lot of people were flying it, then everyone would get a lower reward per kill, and although they would have a lot of kills, they would not progress. The less a plane was flown by others, the more rewards you got in it provided you were skilled enough to get kills.

Now, lets get back into MWO... Imagine that you could reap triple the rewards if you take a Dragon, instead of a Warhammer into a faction match? You are a player with a certain skill level. Your skill level does not change depending on your mech. Your efficiency does change, because one mech is not as good as the other. So, by being rewarded hugely for playing with an under-performing mech, you can still be motivated to take it into a match.

This system does not have to be limited to earnings. It can affect ladder progression of a player or a unit. It can also affect objectives in a match. Here are some examples:

Example: if you are in a scouting faction match, you are in an under-performing variant of the Locust, you can have a faster cap time than the META variant of the Locust.

Example: You can have faster re-spawn time in a less played mech, compared to a META mech.

Example: you are Liao loyalist; take an iconic faction-related chassis and you double your bonus.

So, how would this work? The bonus multiplier for each mech should be calculated in real time from the number of said mechs currently in game or in queue or both. Since I don't know how this works code-wise in MWO, I cannot say what would be the most CPU and NET efficient process. But if it worked in a game from 20 years ago, across a 56kbit modem connection with about 100 players online in the arena, I am sure it can work today when we have a unified server and server stats readily available. This system is basically an extension of the waiting times indicator for mech classes, so I guess there is a basis on which this can be feasible.

I hope you take this suggestion into account. I think it is an old but proven principle and whatever has been proven to work in the past should be used. Especially since there is a constant effort on your part to balance that which can't and shouldn't be balanced directly.

This system will work because whatever changes are introduced to the current META play style, or build, the population itself will return it into the balance if properly incentivized.

Edited by RokerSaMoravu, 03 January 2017 - 02:17 AM.


#2 CharlieChap

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 52 posts

Posted 03 January 2017 - 05:57 AM

Quote

Give every mech chassis a positive or a negative bonus for XP, GXP and C-Bill earning in a match, based on how much this particular chassis is currently played by the MWO population.


Like this idea. Certainly might help increase the Light and Medium numbers in the game also.

#3 102_devill

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 140 posts

Posted 06 January 2017 - 03:07 AM

Should have made a post about which mech I want next in the game. Would have had more comments.
This community doesn't really deserve a better game than it got.

#4 Karl Streiger

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Wrath
  • Wrath
  • 20,369 posts
  • LocationBlack Dot in a Sea of Blue

Posted 06 January 2017 - 05:29 AM

View Post102_devill, on 06 January 2017 - 03:07 AM, said:

Should have made a post about which mech I want next in the game. Would have had more comments.
This community doesn't really deserve a better game than it got.

You could have done it - but don't you think that in 5 years of this forum not four or five guys independend from each other had the same idea?

Sorry to say - but the best idea to make all mechs worthwhile is to drop the PSR - and add BV based on data driven usage of this chassis.

Oh btw this was also a idea that was suggested by at least 3 guys independent from each other, but only Grayson Marik used it for the BWO were it proofed its worth.

But even such a tested system is not used - instead we've got PSR based on MM and I don't understand all those guys that worked so hard to lobby it.


anyhow:

why should "reward" don't work?
The reward is directly linked to the damage, kills surviving what ever.....a worse chassis gives you less probability to earn those rewards.
Not to mention that in a bad chassis dropping with random guys in random chassis on more or less random maps in more or less random game modes - the chances to win is reduced and the game becomes even more a lottery.

With a good mech you might overcome those disadvantages and maybe its enough to secure victory for your team = more income.

#5 102_devill

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • Mercenary Rank 3
  • 140 posts

Posted 06 January 2017 - 07:31 AM

@Karl,

thanks for your answer, now I know how to bait discussions. Certainly not with good ideas.

I don't care if this idea is not new, you can credit whoever you want with it, my goal is not to be the forum messiah. I just want to change something because this game has so much potential which is not used.

You don't know that this idea wouldn't work.

This system worked before in other games and all your arguments why it wouldn't here can be easily rebuffed.

But, yeah, there is no point. This community doesn't really want a better game. If they did, we would be playing faction warfare in stock mechs now.

#6 Insanity09

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Death Wish
  • 551 posts

Posted 06 January 2017 - 12:36 PM

This idea and things like it would be a great way to bring more variety back into the game.

I would be less worried about whatever the current meta is, that is really just a FOTM. Old metas are still valid. They worked before, it just becomes less popular and useful if people are used to seeing it and always know how to counter it.

Simply judging a chassis and variant on whether it is effective or not should be sufficient, and ideally PGI has the data metrics to show that (though with a less played chassis that becomes a challenge).

Any sort of bonus mechanism, be it a multiplier, or a flat bonus, becomes useful as an incentive.

#7 VonBruinwald

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undisputed
  • The Undisputed
  • 3,460 posts
  • LocationRandis IV

Posted 06 January 2017 - 01:02 PM

I like the premise, got some thoughts though:
  • Rather than using 'live' data have it based on the previous 7 days (or 30 days if you want to go big) so it gives a more stable rotation of 'mechs
  • Have split brackets rather than a sliding scale to make it easier to follow (25 most popular get rewards halved, 25 least, doubled. Every other 'mech gets the normal rate).






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users