Jump to content

So Does Clan Get Their Tonnage Back?


85 replies to this topic

#21 Black Ivan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 1,698 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:13 AM

PGIs lack of any sort of population control or where the big and good groups and is the main problem. Allowing anybody go everywhere creates such inbalanced scenarios, without strict and hard control this will stay.

#22 Lupis Volk

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 2,126 posts
  • LocationIn the cockpit of the nearest Light Battlemech.

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:41 AM

View PostBlack Ivan, on 17 January 2017 - 02:13 AM, said:

PGIs lack of any sort of population control or where the big and good groups and is the main problem. Allowing anybody go everywhere creates such inbalanced scenarios, without strict and hard control this will stay.

yep, Bush whacker comes out next week, so all the Units will go to IS to grind them.

#23 Albino Boo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 281 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 03:41 AM

The extra tonnage means that the competent player can carry more potatoes. I have positive win/loss and kdr so I carry more than I get get carried but there is a limit of how much I can carry. I'm not good enough to carry a team against kcom, evil, mj12 etc but I could carry an average clan pug against an average IS group drop. I cant do that anymore unless the tonnage becomes more equal.

Edited by Albino Boo, 17 January 2017 - 03:42 AM.


#24 Palfatreos

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 398 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 06:02 AM

IS op clan need buff to 260 tonnage Posted Image #4EbonJaguarDreamTeam Posted Image

#25 Nighthawk513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 234 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 06:25 AM

260 would be double kodiak, double cheetah.

I actually want assualts to be less common in faction play, not more. So 250 IS 240 Clan would be enough.

#26 Lily from animove

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Devoted
  • The Devoted
  • 13,891 posts
  • LocationOn a dropship to Terra

Posted 17 January 2017 - 06:33 AM

View PostNighthawk513, on 17 January 2017 - 06:25 AM, said:

260 would be double kodiak, double cheetah.

I actually want assualts to be less common in faction play, not more. So 250 IS 240 Clan would be enough.


the game felt a lot better during medium madness event. so maybe we should even go to 220vs200t so people really cannot bring much assaults but then this also limits PGI's sales on assaults and ehavies as they are less needed. but that may be too harsh initially, so staring with something like 240 v 225 might be a better start.

More mediums would at leats mean less high alphas flying around, more dynamic because less slow fatties and taking an high end tonnage assault really means a sacrifice somewhere else.

Edited by Lily from animove, 17 January 2017 - 06:35 AM.


#27 Nighthawk513

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 234 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 06:45 AM

Plus if you did manage to cram an assualt in, there would be the appropriate "Oh S***" reaction from the enemy.
However, this would really make a lot of the assualt specialists mad...

#28 Lovas

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Cadet
  • 436 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 07:08 AM

View PostDakota1000, on 16 January 2017 - 07:00 PM, said:

Well, the mercs have finished leveling their Marauder IICs and moved back on over to IS and winning at very high rates. Does Clan get their tonnage back and IS get their tonnage reduced again now?

Will IS players still continue saying Clans OP while stomping Clanners?


lol, not until we push the front back at least halfway. :)

#29 Ahh Screw it - WATCH THIS

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 130 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 08:16 AM

View Postnaterist, on 17 January 2017 - 01:52 AM, said:

Not really, ive been watching the pugs migrate clanside for a while now. Its what people do usually if theyre new and run into evil.


THIS is exactly what is happening.

The PUGS are moving to the clans now, and they are bringing their LRM assaults with them.

#30 Natural Predator

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 690 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 08:58 AM

Clans should be moved up to 245 Tons, That way we can at least drop 3 65 tonners and 1 50 ton mech. Assaults vs Shadow cats is not very fun. If you get a skilled group vs skilled group and it comes down to wave 4 IS have a decisive advantage despite the fact that clans have probably killed more actual weight at that point. Just move us up to 245 so we can bring good 50 ton mechs instead of shadow cats.

#31 VitriolicViolet

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Corsair
  • The Corsair
  • 592 posts
  • LocationAustralia, Melbourne

Posted 17 January 2017 - 11:57 AM

changing tonnage does nearly nothing for those who suck or wont listen/coordinate. Its a massive buff to anyone who will listen/coordinate. Its a force multiplier where while the pugs can bring more weight, and a small increase in effectiveness, the coordinated teams can too making them even better.

12 uncoordinated heavies/assaults will often lose to 12 organised communicating lights/mediums. My old unit did a light rush on Boreal once and the enemy accused us of cheating because we got within 700m of the gens before they had even left them (lots of assaults and when there were no gates/turrets ,CW.3).

But basically tonnage increases improve the organised way more then the unorganised

#32 Natural Predator

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 690 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 12:09 PM

View PostVitriolicViolet, on 17 January 2017 - 11:57 AM, said:

changing tonnage does nearly nothing for those who suck or wont listen/coordinate. Its a massive buff to anyone who will listen/coordinate. Its a force multiplier where while the pugs can bring more weight, and a small increase in effectiveness, the coordinated teams can too making them even better.

12 uncoordinated heavies/assaults will often lose to 12 organised communicating lights/mediums. My old unit did a light rush on Boreal once and the enemy accused us of cheating because we got within 700m of the gens before they had even left them (lots of assaults and when there were no gates/turrets ,CW.3).

But basically tonnage increases improve the organised way more then the unorganised


Yeah but that shouldn't be the measuring stick to determine weight differences. The measuring stick should be organized vs organized.

#33 Sarsaparilla Kid

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 664 posts
  • LocationGold Country

Posted 17 January 2017 - 12:29 PM

View PostRagnar Baron Leiningen, on 17 January 2017 - 12:09 PM, said:


Yeah but that shouldn't be the measuring stick to determine weight differences. The measuring stick should be organized vs organized.


So, have different drop deck tonnage limits based on group size, similar to the group queue in QP?

#34 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:33 PM

View PostAhh Screw it - WATCH THIS, on 17 January 2017 - 08:16 AM, said:


THIS is exactly what is happening.

The PUGS are moving to the clans now, and they are bringing their LRM assaults with them.


I hope that's the case. My god the bitter irony - LURM scrub suicide puggles switch to Clans so good teams can carry them to wins they don't deserve and those teams switch to IS and they still get farmed.

I don't know if it's true or not but the idea makes me warm and fuzzy.

#35 Lupis Volk

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Mercenary
  • Mercenary
  • 2,126 posts
  • LocationIn the cockpit of the nearest Light Battlemech.

Posted 17 January 2017 - 02:56 PM

View PostMischiefSC, on 17 January 2017 - 02:33 PM, said:

I hope that's the case. My god the bitter irony - LURM scrub suicide puggles switch to Clans so good teams can carry them to wins they don't deserve and those teams switch to IS and they still get farmed.

I don't know if it's true or not but the idea makes me warm and fuzzy.

Hmmm it is indeed a dish best severed cold.

#36 RaptorCWS

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Predator
  • The Predator
  • 144 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 03:00 PM

View PostSarsaparilla Kid, on 17 January 2017 - 12:29 PM, said:


So, have different drop deck tonnage limits based on group size, similar to the group queue in QP?

no. because what happens when a group learns to sync drop to work around and exploit. you do not base balance off the encounters of pugs and those in lower tiers. you balance it from the top. because they are the closest in skill level to each other and know how to min max their builds and strategies,

Edited by RaptorCWS, 17 January 2017 - 03:00 PM.


#37 Albino Boo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 281 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 03:28 PM

View PostRaptorCWS, on 17 January 2017 - 03:00 PM, said:

no. because what happens when a group learns to sync drop to work around and exploit. you do not base balance off the encounters of pugs and those in lower tiers. you balance it from the top. because they are the closest in skill level to each other and know how to min max their builds and strategies,


No you do not balance for the top because they from the minority matches played. This would distort the marjority of matches. You balance for the mid point of players numbers. If you reworked LRMs so they worked for the top teams, they would be massively overpowered to the average player.

#38 RaptorCWS

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Predator
  • The Predator
  • 144 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 03:45 PM

View PostAlbino Boo, on 17 January 2017 - 03:28 PM, said:

No you do not balance for the top because they from the minority matches played. This would distort the marjority of matches. You balance for the mid point of players numbers. If you reworked LRMs so they worked for the top teams, they would be massively overpowered to the average player.

lol, im sure thats how riot balances league, valve with counterstrike/ dota, or blizzard with starcraft. they look at mediocre players who cant figure out the best strategies for the game and caters for them (sarcasm if you cant tell). you look at the top. they play the game the most, they understand the mechanics. i doubt blizzard makes changes to starcraft based off of bronze and silver league game results. learn to game dev.

#39 Albino Boo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 281 posts

Posted 17 January 2017 - 03:50 PM

View PostRaptorCWS, on 17 January 2017 - 03:45 PM, said:

lol, im sure thats how riot balances league, valve with counterstrike/ dota, or blizzard with starcraft. they look at mediocre players who cant figure out the best strategies for the game and caters for them (sarcasm if you cant tell). you look at the top. they play the game the most, they understand the mechanics. i doubt blizzard makes changes to starcraft based off of bronze and silver league game results. learn to game dev.

Err I would point out that all the games you mention have far less variables. The comparable games are WoT and Warthunder neither of which balance for less than 100 players out of their total player base

#40 Danjo San

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Hero of Liao
  • Hero of Liao
  • 1,020 posts

Posted 18 January 2017 - 01:28 AM

View PostBlack Ivan, on 17 January 2017 - 02:13 AM, said:

PGIs lack of any sort of population control or where the big and good groups and is the main problem. Allowing anybody go everywhere creates such inbalanced scenarios, without strict and hard control this will stay.
that has been the problem since phase 1





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users