676 replies to this topic

[Edward Hazen]

fireball 4, on 29 March 2017 - 09:05 PM, said:

"No, I said the current, POST-Dark Age (after the HPG network was rebuilt) and it is basically just like it was right after the fall of the (first) Star League, except that the factions are a bit different. Mainly, though, everyone basically has equal technology in the post-Dark Age."

hmm what book details post dark age? I thought they said they were going to move the time line forward this year.
I'm working off of field manual 3145 for most my dark age fix.

Edit: And what did they do to balance ferolamer and rad heatsink further?

You are right, I double checked and no sourcebooks are released yet from the post-Dark Age, I must have just read about the upcoming era. Really, I had quit playing TT (and MechWarrior) by the time that the Dark Age was out, but I generally like the lore of the Dark Age, plus the Shrike is a damn fine looking mech. Yes, some tech in the Dark Age is OP, but it seems like most factions had access to most of the tech, so the imbalance would be minimal.

[Corviness]

Zergling, on 29 March 2017 - 04:14 AM, said:

Actually, Clan mechs have more DPS in addition to more range.





Asymmetric balance is a terrible idea, because most players won't like playing weaker mechs than their opponents.
This will lead to most players wanting to play Clans, despite that faction needing the fewest players to fill a battle.

End result of that? Ridiculously long queues that will drive players away from the game.

I don't think, that the biggest part of the community would switch to clan, because its balanced by tonnage and maxium of ingame mechs.

Yes in 1 vs 1 a Clan mech would be technological better, but this will never happen.

You start with 12 IS vs 9-10 Clanners, the clanners have fewer free tonnage, the IS more. So you will never feel this. I know what Iam talking about, because we balanced it with this 2 thinks, tonnage and maximum players in team. Again, it worked perfectly.
With a working groupmanager program, who works with this 2 thinks, you would have lovely matches in quickplays and also in faction warfare.
This isnt a problem. Its only 1 file with formulas, that would be need to wrote and good. Enough Non-PGI player tested this, even before we take the problem and solved it. And if they implemented new technology in future, PGI could scale this smart also with this 2 parameters "tonnage" and "maximum players in a team".

PS: Ah, and before I forget it, this also would be nice for our lore-guys. So it's a win (normal players), win (lore-players), win (PGI) situation. What do we want more?.

Edited by Corviness, 30 March 2017 - 05:58 AM.

[Zergling]

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 05:56 AM, said:

I don't think, that the biggest part of the community would switch to clan, because its balanced by tonnage and maxium of ingame mechs.

Yes in 1 vs 1 a Clan mech would be technological better, but this will never happen.

You start with 12 IS vs 9-10 Clanners, the clanners have fewer free tonnage, the IS more. So you will never feel this. I know what Iam talking about, because we balanced it with this 2 thinks, tonnage and maximum players in team. Again, it worked perfectly.
With a working groupmanager program, who works with this 2 thinks, you would have lovely matches in quickplays and also in faction warfare.
This isnt a problem. Its only 1 file with formulas, that would be need to wrote and good. Enough Non-PGI player tested this, even before we take the problem and solved it. And if they implemented new technology in future, PGI could scale this smart also with this 2 parameters "tonnage" and "maximum players in a team".

PS: Ah, and before I forget it, this also would be nice for our lore-guys. So it's a win (normal players), win (lore-players), win (PGI) situation. What do we want more?.

You have absolutely zero idea what the 'normal players' like, want or how they behave.

Edited by Zergling, 30 March 2017 - 06:02 AM.

[Corviness]

Zergling, on 30 March 2017 - 06:01 AM, said:

You have absolutely zero idea what the 'normal players' like, want or how they behave.

But you do? I would say you have as much idea about the whole community as me.

And before you talk down a idea, try it out first and THAN criticize it. The other way around doesn't work, because theory and practise are 2 pair of shoes.

Keep in mind, our clan and a kurita team tested it in several scenarios and it worked. If you like it/believe it or not.

Edited by Corviness, 30 March 2017 - 06:18 AM.

[Zergling]

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 06:08 AM, said:

But you do? I would say you have as much idea about the whole community like me.

And before you talk down a idea, try it out first and THAN criticize it. The other way around doesn't work, because theory and practise are 2 pair of shoes.

Keep in mind, our clan and a kurita team tested it in several scenarios and it worked. If you like it/believe it or not.

You think your ideas are good, because you have been testing them in an echo chamber of like minds. That doesn't give you any sort of realistic idea about how your 'idea' will actually work in the real world.

Go read the forums and reddit, see how many people currently playing MWO want balance. Go look at other games, see how much people hold balance as being important.
Then go look at how many other multiplayer games out there have asymmetrically sized teams.

If you can't read anything from that, then see my previous post again.


Oh yeah, there is one multiplayer game out there with asymmetrically sized teams: Evolve, which is 1vs4 players, a single Monster player vs four Hunter players.
And the queue times for Monster players have always been waaaaaaaay longer than Hunter, because people naturally want to play the Monster, because whoever is the monster is as powerful as the other 4 players combined.

If MWO had asymmetric team balance, the exact same thing would happen; most people will want to play Clan, and matchmaker queue times will choke as a direct result.

Edited by Zergling, 30 March 2017 - 06:22 AM.

[Angel Devereaux]

Not sure if this has been asked and answered, but will the new IS tech have the same drawbacks as the clan counterparts?

[Corviness]

Zergling, on 30 March 2017 - 06:16 AM, said:

You think your ideas are good, because you have been testing them in an echo chamber of like minds. That doesn't give you any sort of realistic idea about how your 'idea' will actually work in the real world.

Go read the forums and reddit, see how many people currently playing MWO want balance. Go look at other games, see how much people hold balance as being important.
Then go look at how many other multiplayer games out there have asymmetrically sized teams.

If you can't read anything from that, then see my previous post again.

Yes, than test it in our nice testing servers and good, where is the problem? And only for your information, we where 50 players, not 2 or 3 or whatever.
And like you said, "how your 'idea' will actually work in the real world". Thanks that you agree my sentence: "And before you talk down a idea, try it out first and THAN criticize it" So lets do it. Test it and than criticize it. I don't understand your problem. Maybe you are afraid or don't like it, that a guy have an Idea you doesn't like?
And thx for your tip, but I do that years ago, till now and I will also in future. You must think Im a stupid guy, do you? I played enough games with asymmetrically teams and thats not the problem.

The biggest uncontrollable parameter is, how skilled are the players on the sides, but like I said, they are uncontrollable.

Edited by Corviness, 30 March 2017 - 06:26 AM.

[Zergling]

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 06:25 AM, said:

Yes, than test it in our nice testing servers and good, where is the problem? And only for your information, we where 50 players, not 2 or 3 or whatever.

It has no relevance to how the rest of the playerbase thinks or behaves.

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 06:25 AM, said:

And like you said, "how your 'idea' will actually work in the real world". Thanks that you agree my sentence: "And before you talk down a idea, try it out first and THAN criticize it" So lets do it. Test it and than criticize it. I don't understand your problem. Maybe you are afraid or don't like it, that a guy have an Idea you doesn't like?

The idea doesn't need to be tested, because it is blatantly obvious that it is fundamentally flawed.

It would be a complete waste of time and effort to bother trying it out, when the disadvantages are well known and prevent it from becoming a practical solution to faction balance in MWO.

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 06:25 AM, said:

You must think Im a stupid guy, do you?

You said it, not me. I can't help it if you feel that way.

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 06:25 AM, said:

I played enough games with asymmetrically teams and thats not the problem.

Name one with a random matchmaker, that lets players pick their team before queuing up.

The only one that I'm aware of, is Evolve. And as I mentioned in my previous post, that game had severe matchmaking issues directly because of asymmetric team sizes


Hell, if PGI somehow decided to screw over MWO completely by implementing this daft idea, I would shelve all my Inner Sphere mechs and play exclusively Clan, and so would the majority of the playerbase.
Because people naturally want to feel individually powerful, and such a team of more powerful but less numerous mechs would require less teamwork to win, allowing a higher skill player to carry a team more easily.

What you are proposing would be the death of MWO, it is that bad an idea. And thankfully, PGI have never shown any indication of wanting to do it.
When even PGI won't touch the idea with a 10 foot pole, you can be assured it is a terrible idea.

[Mcgral18]

Angel Devereaux, on 30 March 2017 - 06:24 AM, said:

Not sure if this has been asked and answered, but will the new IS tech have the same drawbacks as the clan counterparts?

Which drawbacks are those?
They're generally heavier and larger, so additional drawbacks
Lasers have less damage&range

Zergling, on 30 March 2017 - 06:43 AM, said:

Hell, if PGI somehow decided to screw over MWO completely by implementing this daft idea, I would shelve all my Inner Sphere mechs and play exclusively Clan, and so would the majority of the playerbase.
Because people naturally want to feel individually powerful, and such a team of more powerful but less numerous mechs would require less teamwork to win, allowing a higher skill player to carry a team more easily.

What you are proposing would be the death of MWO, it is that bad an idea. And thankfully, PGI have never shown any indication of wanting to do it.
When even PGI won't touch the idea with a 10 foot pole, you can be assured it is a terrible idea.

Can confirm
Clams are more powerful now, and I play them almost exclusively (Why can't I leave you, WubShee?)

If they got even more powerful, and 2 fewer players?
Aw yiss, fewer Potatos to Carry, AND extra damage to farm (because of less guns on your side)?!
WIN WIN!

[Zergling]

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 06:56 AM, said:

Zergling, the only thing you could do is talking bad about this idea, but you never tested it. Best think, that you say it dont need to be tested. How ignorant a human could be. Never saw the idea on the field, but talk it bad. You a funny, really.
If this idea is so bad, than give us another one you think, that is good. If you don't have one, test the ideas other ppl have and than critcize them. Last word from me.
I don't need to talk with ppl, who have no proofments about their reviews, they do without testing anything, really.

It is a bad idea to stick your head in a a wood chipper while it is turned on. I don't need to test that out to know it is a bad idea, because it is bloody obvious to anyone with at least two brain cells.

All it takes is basic logic and understanding of simple human behaviour to know asymmetrically sized teams is a bad idea, so testing is completely unnecessary.

[Ghardyne Dynamics]

Zergling, on 30 March 2017 - 06:43 AM, said:

It has no relevance to how the rest of the playerbase thinks or behaves.

The idea doesn't need to be tested, because it is blatantly obvious that it is fundamentally flawed.

It would be a complete waste of time and effort to bother trying it out, when the disadvantages are well known and prevent it from becoming a practical solution to faction balance in MWO.


.......


Name one with a random matchmaker, that lets players pick their team before queuing up.

The only one that I'm aware of, is Evolve. And as I mentioned in my previous post, that game had severe matchmaking issues directly because of asymmetric team sizes


Hell, if PGI somehow decided to screw over MWO completely by implementing this daft idea, I would shelve all my Inner Sphere mechs and play exclusively Clan, and so would the majority of the playerbase.
Because people naturally want to feel individually powerful, and such a team of more powerful but less numerous mechs would require less teamwork to win, allowing a higher skill player to carry a team more easily.

What you are proposing would be the death of MWO, it is that bad an idea. And thankfully, PGI have never shown any indication of wanting to do it.
When even PGI won't touch the idea with a 10 foot pole, you can be assured it is a terrible idea.

World of Tanks, World of Warships, Warthunder, World of Warcraft (BG´s have teams of random classes and random class roles) and every other freaking F2P title with faction based research/class trees.
To name a few. If you want more I can give you more.

Btw you either have no clue or idea how thousands of other players think and feel about other people ideas.
Just because you don´t like it does not mean your opinion is better or has more weight than someone elses.





I am fairly new to this game (started in autumn of last year) and I do not like most of the Clan Mechs.
99% of my Mechbays are filled with IS Mechs and after some time derping around not knowing the maps or what mech with what build is dangerous etc. I am getting better and I definetly don´t fear any Clan Mech just because he is a Clanner.
I fear the individual Mech with his individual build in the exact moment I meet them on the battlefield.

Yes they are stronger but that does not mean you can´t balance around that "Problem".
It can definetly be done but it has to be tested.
You can have the best Mech in the game but if you lack skill or you are caught in the wrong moment you are FUBAR.
The theoretical power of your Mech does not help you if you and your team are in a match with a theoretical evenly powered enemy team. it does not matter if they are all IS or Clanners too.

When the Numbers are balanced everything depents on skill an situation. Nothing else and Nothing more.

I would gladly test the "gamemode" Corviness suggested. And If it works I will glady play it in the future.

Edited by Ghardyne Dynamics, 30 March 2017 - 07:05 AM.

[Dee Eight]

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 06:25 AM, said:

Yes, than test it in our nice testing servers and good, where is the problem? And only for your information, we where 50 players, not 2 or 3 or whatever.

Oh the irony... 50 players test an idea and agree it works and you get told they do not speak for thousands of others... but when 50 complained about the new skill tree...apparently THEN they were speaking for thousands of others.

[Corviness]

Ghardyne Dynamics, on 30 March 2017 - 07:02 AM, said:

World of Tanks, World of Warships, Warthunder, World of Warcraft (BG´s have teams of random classes and random class roles) and every other freaking F2P title with faction based research/class trees.
To name a few. If you want more I can give you more.

Btw you either have no clue or idea how thousands of other players think and feel about other people ideas.
Just because you don´t like it does not mean your opinion is better or has more weight than someone elses.





I am fairly new to this game (started in autumn of last year) and I do not like most of the Clan Mechs.
99% of my Mechbays are filled with IS Mechs and after some time derping around not knowing the maps or what mech with what build is dangerous etc. I am getting better and I definetly don´t fear any Clan Mech just because he is a Clanner.
I fear the individual Mech with his individual build in the exact moment I meet them on the battlefield.

Yes they are stronger but that does not mean you can´t balance around that "Problem".
It can definetly be done but it has to be tested.
You can have the best Mech in the game but if you lack skill or you are caught in the wrong moment you are FUBAR.
The theoretical power of your Mech does not help you if you and your team are in a match with a theoretical evenly powered enemy team. it does not matter if they are all IS or Clanners too.

When the Numbers are balanced everything depents on skill an situation. Nothing else and Nothing more.

I would gladly test the "gamemode" Corviness suggested. And If it works I will glady play it in the future.

Never mind, their are ppl on this world, who talk against all, but have no other/better idea, only to have the last word or to dominate ppl.

Edited by Corviness, 30 March 2017 - 07:36 AM.

[Corviness]

Dee Eight, on 30 March 2017 - 07:28 AM, said:

Oh the irony... 50 players test an idea and agree it works and you get told they do not speak for thousands of others... but when 50 complained about the new skill tree...apparently THEN they were speaking for thousands of others.

Or one guy don't like your idea, but think he speaks for all.

[Zergling]

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 07:31 AM, said:

Never mind, their are ppl on this world, who talk against all, but have no other/better idea, only to have the last word or to dominate ppl.

And there are also people so stuck in their own little world they have formed, they don't realise just how their ideas would fail to work when confronted with basic human behaviour.

Corviness, on 30 March 2017 - 07:31 AM, said:

And nobody can say, how it works on this next stage, not me, not even you.

I can, as can anyone that applies a smidgen of logical reasoning and understanding of human behaviour in video games.

Edited by Zergling, 30 March 2017 - 07:39 AM.

[Corviness]

Ghardyne Dynamics, on 30 March 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:

Yeah you are right they do not. But all you asked for was a MM Game were you predetermin your "faction" before the game. So what is preventing MWO from testing uneven Team sizes? Just because others did not do it? If everyone would think that way we would not even have MWO.



You think you understand how other humans behave even when shown they do not behave like you mentioned makes your opinion better? Tell me more

Because I am surely not behaving like you said. So does that make me the one polluting your idea in the backpipe? Btw you are also biased in favour of your own pet idea about your knowledge of human behaviour.




Yeah you did that. But I did sell every Clanner I bought and tested. The only one I kept was a Shadowcat from the Steam packages because I can not sell it. I do not care if they are better on the paper I do not like most of their hardpoint locations or their geometry. The Ebon Jaguar is a really good Mech on paper but I hate it and will never again play one.

As said before just because you behave like you do does not mean you know how everyone else does.



I am sorry do break it down to you but you are the only one not discussion the suggestion but throwing a tantrum like a child.

So go throw your toys around and let the adults discuss it in the living room.

Ghardyne, he will talk and talk everytime against you if you post somthing, that could tilt some of his opinon, its wasted time, you talk against a wall. ^^

[Ghardyne Dynamics]

I do not mind it. I like to talk against narrowminded people Corviness.
Actually I really enjoy it.

Edited by Ghardyne Dynamics, 30 March 2017 - 07:46 AM.

[Ghardyne Dynamics]

Zergling, on 30 March 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

Already answered.

With nothing but comments about your definition of human behaviour. Which, as shown by humans not behaving like you mentioned, is flawed.

Zergling, on 30 March 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

Lol, they do behave exactly as I described.

So the evidence that I am not behaving like you said is proof that people behave like you said?
This would only work If we would have a scientific study with a controlled negativ testgroup.

Zergling, on 30 March 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

Logical fallacy. You think that because you personally behave in one way, everyone else will. A single person behaving one way, doesn't mean most won't behave in another way.

As for my bias, that is a bias in favor of logical reasoning and actual understanding of the topic. There is nothing wrong with that sort of bias, as it leads to informed decision making that produces good solutions.

You do read what you write do you? Because Logical fallacy. You think that because you personally behave in one way, everyone else will. A single person behaving one way, doesn't mean most won't behave in another way.

Zergling, on 30 March 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

Which has led to your bias that Clan mechs can't be good, because that is easier for a human ego to handle than to admit they might have failed.

And here you show us that you don´t read what I am writing. Because I clearly said that they are more Powerful or in your words better. They are good but I do not like most of them. Taste is not defined by raw power of an object.

Zergling, on 30 March 2017 - 07:46 AM, said:

I was being deliberately rude to demonstrate my contempt for those discussing things they have no actual understanding of.

Got a rise out of you and made you resort to insults, didn't it?

You have to excuse me but those were not insults. I merely let myself down on your level of discussion to demonstrate you how rude you behave yourself.

And by saying I would love to test the suggested mode to see if it works and play it in the future if it works is a sign of not knowing what I am talking about?

So you are saying that I have no idea about my own will to test something to see if it works?

This does not make any sense.

[Zergling]

See, I've already articulated my logical reasoning about why asymmetrical team size balance is a bad idea, but here it is again for completeness:

1) Human beings want to feel powerful, so they'll choose the most powerful class; Clan mechs.
2) Smaller teams require less teamwork and are easier for high skill players to carry.

Both those factors mean Clans will be vastly more popular than Inner Sphere. And that is a severe problem, because Clans require fewer players than Inner Sphere.
In any multiplayer game, that would cause matchmaking issues. In a game like MWO with such a small playerbase, that would be game breaking; the matchmaker queue times would shoot through the roof, and drive players away from the game.

Now, in response to that logical reasoning and conclusions, the refutation I've received has only been 'you're wrong' responses without any sort of logical reasoning to actually refute my reasoning and conclusions.

When people respond like that, they simply aren't worthy of any sort of consideration; they have ceased to have relevant opinions.
The people that do have worthwhile opinions all agree with me, so I actually haven't been arguing; I've just been throwing the sort of behaviour at them that will 'trigger' them, resulting in some quite hilarious responses.


EDIT: oh yeah, because they aren't worth my time, I've blocked em both. Watch as they continue trying to argue with me!

Edited by Zergling, 30 March 2017 - 08:32 AM.

[Ghardyne Dynamics]

Ahahahaha look how ignorant I am in this discussion by posting my theory and simultaniously block people who do not like my opinion.

You just gotta love the dude.

Anyway for the sake of discussion ( and I love discussions):

1) Your whole theory is based upon the lust for power but in a video game this does not always work because there are people like me and others who have another motivation. Some like me choose what brings them the most joy even when this means they handicap themselfes and others like to derp around trying to duel with specific players in QP matches.
Just because you behave in one way does not mean others will do the same.

2) When tuned correctly being outnumbered evens the playingfield considering needed teamplay and the possibility of a carry from a much higher skilled person. But skill is something you need a whole other system to balance. Currently we got the tier system but to be honest it is more lackluster than a real solution.

I hope others in this community are not that narrowheaded and are open for discussion or even testing new ideas.

Greetings Ghardyne