270 replies to this topic

[BLOOD WOLF]

CainenEX, on 29 March 2017 - 05:42 PM, said:

snip

first off all. Omitted builds don't tell me what could work or what doesn't. For all we know there are a multitude of combinations yet to be exploited for good use.

Thx for the article, its only 1 article. Not that the author doesn't make good cases.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 29 March 2017 - 05:50 PM.

[EgoSlayer]

EgoSlayer, on 29 March 2017 - 05:17 PM, said:

BLOOD WOLF, on 29 March 2017 - 04:43 PM, said:

using the comp scene as a way to balance is not a good way to go about doing that.

Sorry, but you're completely wrong. You have to balance based on the comp tier because they are the ones that find and utilize what becomes OP/Meta. Ignoring comp as a balance foundation is tantamount to having no balance at all.

Quote

xeromynd, on 29 March 2017 - 05:08 PM, said:

I genuinely don't understand where you guys are getting the impression that they're discussing balance during this Roundtable. The title says they're discussing "the comp scene, MWOWC, and community run leagues and tournaments."

BLOOD WOLF, on 29 March 2017 - 05:29 PM, said:

Ask Egoslayer, and Cainen.

Put my quote in the proper context, don't misquote it. Where did I say anything about what they are going to discuss in the round table? I was just remarking that your comment on balance is completely asinine.

Edited by EgoSlayer, 29 March 2017 - 06:10 PM.

[mdmzero0]

BLOOD WOLF, on 29 March 2017 - 05:46 PM, said:

first off all. Omitted builds don't tell me what could work or what doesn't. For all we know there are a multitude of combinations yet to be exploited for good use.

Thx for the article, its only 1 article. Not that the author doesn't make good cases.

What do you mean by omitted builds? There are some leagues that do restrict what mechs and weapons you can take (e.g., like MRBC with no hero mechs and no clan streaks in drop 1), while others have no restrictions (like the Mechwarrior Online World Championships).

[BLOOD WOLF]

EgoSlayer, on 29 March 2017 - 06:02 PM, said:

Put my quote in the proper context, don't misquote it. Where did I say anything about what they are going to discuss in the round table? I was just remarking that your comment on balance is completely asinine.

i never said you said that

[JonDoeIowa]

I'll pass, with PGI's staff I don't see them being able to reach out and expand the comp scene. This is why players are having to handle it and begged for so long to get private lobbies.

[BLOOD WOLF]

mdmzero0, on 29 March 2017 - 06:03 PM, said:

What do you mean by omitted builds? There are some leagues that do restrict what mechs and weapons you can take (e.g., like MRBC with no hero mechs and no clan streaks in drop 1), while others have no restrictions (like the Mechwarrior Online World Championships).

so i wasn't talking about league restrictions. I was alluding to conversations I had in the past with people on this forum about good builds. Often comp players are used as refrence points for mechs and builds. So it's plausable that if you balance strictly from a comp scene viewpoint, they do not use certain mechs(often, and not at all), and builds(often, and not at all). So by that they would just omit certain builds. That's not my view, I am just going by the things I have read.

It's completly possible that instead of looking at balance from a comp perspective, would mean they take into account everything, which would be more likely.

However to put it as somebody did in this thread,

xeromynd, on 29 March 2017 - 05:08 PM, said:

I genuinely don't understand where you guys are getting the impression that they're discussing balance during this Roundtable.

They are only going to talk about the wider comp scene and what they can do to improve it, not mech balance.(I think)

Jondoeiowa, on 29 March 2017 - 06:06 PM, said:

I'll pass,

then you are irreverent, as with anybody who does not participate in this. Also the time it took them to get something up and running bears no effect on the potential outcomes.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 29 March 2017 - 06:14 PM.

[mdmzero0]

BLOOD WOLF, on 29 March 2017 - 06:13 PM, said:

so i wasn't talking about league restrictions. I was alluding to conversations I had in the past with people on this forum about good builds. Often comp players are used as refrence points for mechs and builds. So it's plausable that if you balance strictly from a comp scene viewpoint, they do not use certain mechs(often, and not at all), and builds(often, and not at all). So by that they would just omit certain builds. That's not my view, I am just going by the things I have read.

It's completly possible that instead of looking at balance from a comp perspective, would mean they take into account everything, which would be more likely.
.

The point of balancing comp players is that you try to weaken the builds top players use and buff the ones they don't use, because comp play is all about finding the best mechs and using only them. So those are the mechs that can be scaled down some, while others that don't see use can be improved some. Essentially it's just a way to see which mechs are best.

[BLOOD WOLF]

mdmzero0, on 29 March 2017 - 06:19 PM, said:

The point of balancing comp players is that you try to weaken the builds top players use and buff the ones they don't use, because comp play is all about finding the best mechs and using only them. So those are the mechs that can be scaled down some, while others that don't see use can be improved some. Essentially it's just a way to see which mechs are best.

hmm. hows that worked so far in terms of balance?

seems to me, all mechs should be balanced by now, expect for the new onces that yet to find a place. Then you just balance the new mechs into their niche.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 29 March 2017 - 06:24 PM.

[mdmzero0]

BLOOD WOLF, on 29 March 2017 - 06:23 PM, said:

hmm. hows that worked so far in terms of balance?

Given that PGI has yet to do this, quite poorly.

[BLOOD WOLF]

mdmzero0, on 29 March 2017 - 06:24 PM, said:

Given that PGI has yet to do this, quite poorly.

nice cop out answer.

[CainenEX]

mdmzero0, on 29 March 2017 - 06:19 PM, said:

The point of balancing comp players is that you try to weaken the builds top players use and buff the ones they don't use, because comp play is all about finding the best mechs and using only them. So those are the mechs that can be scaled down some, while others that don't see use can be improved some. Essentially it's just a way to see which mechs are best.

That is quite correct. You minimize risk and capitalize on consistency and performance. If certain build are only being used its because the players took to figure out what works and doesn't work. Hence the article I linked and the need to balance top down.

[mdmzero0]

BLOOD WOLF, on 29 March 2017 - 06:25 PM, said:

nice cop out answer.

How is it a cop out, it's true. PGI doesn't balance on comp players alone. And I believe thats why there's always some head-scratchers when jt comes to balance adjustments. As for how balancing on comp players would actually do in practice, I think it would be good, but I dont know because there's no evidence.

[BLOOD WOLF]

mdmzero0, on 29 March 2017 - 06:27 PM, said:

. As for how balancing on comp players would actually do in practice, I think it would be good, but I dont know because there's no evidence.

You would get just what we see now. A player's ability to pilot a mech. Besides outlier OP or weak mechs. Pilot ability is to much of a loose-cannon variable.

Not all a comp players play the same, and not all comp players do well all the time and any given mech.

So I agree that their is no evidence.

Like when I was watching mech masters or mastermechs last night with bombadil. 2 people he said that were high level players, we in theory should have gotten a knuckle down fight, instead one of them got wrecked. An insane X variable everyone here seems to ignore

Anyways They are not even talking about balancing according to comp scene, they are talking about the improvement or expansion of the comp scene. I will also go ahead and say that there is no evidence of them balancing to comp scene at all, rather they just look at the data of the mechs and weapons in an environment to see what is doing what, and there is evidence for that. Whether they actually use comp matches, if somebody wants to put a link for reference that would be great.

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 29 March 2017 - 06:36 PM.

[CainenEX]

BLOOD WOLF, on 29 March 2017 - 06:31 PM, said:

Like when I was watching mech masters or mastermechs last night with bombadil.

Source please

[BLOOD WOLF]

CainenEX, on 29 March 2017 - 06:35 PM, said:

Source please

let me link, give me a sec.

Does anyone know if they post those for the MWO or NGNG? mech master, whatever they are called.

or does PGI post them? anyways, it was the last one they hosted.

Just watch the last video posted by them, or message Bombadil and he can point you in the right direction. I don't know where they post them

Edited by BLOOD WOLF, 29 March 2017 - 06:47 PM.

[Ted Wayz]

Can the paying community vote on whether or not we have a tournament that uses game funds on a "competitive" tournament that draws no new interest in the game but draws funds from other projects?

If you want to see how "excited" the community is how about the prize pool comes from donations, special sales or crowd funding.

[justcallme A S H]

Ted Wayz, on 29 March 2017 - 06:42 PM, said:

Can the paying community vote on whether or not we have a tournament that uses game funds on a "competitive" tournament that draws no new interest in the game but draws funds from other projects?

If you want to see how "excited" the community is how about the prize pool comes from donations, special sales or crowd funding.

The prize pool came from people buying the Tournament Supporter Packs, which IMO, were a really good idea.

For $15 AUD or whatever for 9 months of 10% cbill boost etc, that part PGI absolutely NAILED. I would gladly get on board with that again as the money went to the community.

[Bombadil]

Mcgral18, on 29 March 2017 - 04:41 PM, said:

Perhaps a statement in regards to balance passes?
Are high end matches used as a benchmark for certain decisions?



...Can they be?
Balancing by Potato hasn't resulted in much success. In fact, it's gone full circle...

Here's that interview I mentioned.
https://mrbcleague.c...php?storyid=240

[BLOOD WOLF]

Bombadil, on 29 March 2017 - 07:04 PM, said:

Here's that interview I mentioned.
https://mrbcleague.c...php?storyid=240

We are both from the Bay area.

[EgoSlayer]

justcallme A S H, on 29 March 2017 - 06:48 PM, said:

The prize pool came from people buying the Tournament Supporter Packs, which IMO, were a really good idea.

For $15 AUD or whatever for 9 months of 10% cbill boost etc, that part PGI absolutely NAILED. I would gladly get on board with that again as the money went to the community.

Less than half of the prize pool came from the Supporter packs, 43K out of the 143K. PGI started with 100K and then the tournament packs added to that. But some percentage of that 100K was sponsored via other suppliers, it wasn't entirely PGI's funds. What percentage only PGI knows.

Edited by EgoSlayer, 29 March 2017 - 07:08 PM.