92 replies to this topic

[Mystere]

Davegt27, on 29 July 2017 - 01:25 AM, said:

would not work anyways

that's TT stuff

Yep! TT stuff is frowned upon in "A Battletech Game".

Edited by Mystere, 29 July 2017 - 05:49 AM.

[Mystere]

MustrumRidcully, on 29 July 2017 - 01:35 AM, said:

That only works reasonably well if the player population is actually distributed in the ratio you want to have. That is probably not really the case.

The solution to that is forced Clan vs IS, Clan vs. Clan, and IS vs. IS fights based on player availability.

Having said that, Clan Star vs. IS Lance will only be workable on game modes built with that in mind (e.g. Escape and Evasion, Assassination). In fact, we should really be having X Formations vs. Y Formations, depending on game mode and not this X vs. X eSports nonsense.

Juodas Varnas, on 29 July 2017 - 01:37 AM, said:

LOL, sure dude, let's pit 5 superior mechs against 4 ******** ones.

Totally balanced dude.

Think "Escape and Evasion" game mode.

Nema Nabojiv, on 29 July 2017 - 01:43 AM, said:

Why would anyone want to play at numerical disadvantage from start.

Excitement? Challenge? A change of pace?

I can think of many ways why.

Cadoazreal, on 29 July 2017 - 02:24 AM, said:

why would anyone want to play at a weapon/battlemech strength disadvantage

That goes for you too.

Edited by Mystere, 29 July 2017 - 06:00 AM.

[Mystere]

lEAKYcUBe, on 29 July 2017 - 02:51 AM, said:

OP...NO...this is a computer game where the battle outcome is not determined by the roll of dice.....

Sigh! Who mentioned anything about dice rolls?

Zergling, on 29 July 2017 - 02:58 AM, said:

This is a terrible idea that has been argued about and determined to be terrible a bunch of times before.

Why is it bad? Because the vast majority of the playerbase would prefer to player the stronger mechs. That means the side that requires the least players, will have the most players wanting to play it.

And that means bad things for the matchmaker.

Forced Clan vs. Clan, Clan vs. Clan, and IS vs. IS based on player availability.

Zergling, on 29 July 2017 - 03:06 AM, said:

Doesn't work in other games, people just keep queuing up the side they want to play.

Hence the above.

Edited by Mystere, 29 July 2017 - 06:06 AM.

[Kanil]

davoodoo, on 29 July 2017 - 03:55 AM, said:

Actually i fear more that it would help is rather than clans in context of of mwo...

... tech superiority for unnerfed clans.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you, but you seem to be implying making Clan 'mechs stronger than they currently are, balancing that out by giving the IS 12 'mechs vs 10. Sounds like a buff to individual Clan 'mechs, yeah?

Most people probably care more about their individual performance than whether the team wins or not. You score 4 kills in a match that your team barely ekes out a loss feels a lot better than a game where you fail miserably but your team manages to win without you.

Clan players are typically going to have better individual performances than the IS players simply because their 'mechs are "designed" to be worth 1.2 IS 'mechs. So people will want to play Clan because being the MLG pro is more fun than being the Zergling that dies a lot.

If this games goes 12v10, I will never play IS again. I'd rather have 50% more kills than not, thank you very much.

[Mystere]

Aggravated Assault Mech, on 29 July 2017 - 03:13 AM, said:

War Thunder events. You'll sit in queue for 15 minutes with 5 other people on the "good" side until you finally get enough seals to club on the other.

Huh? I've never waited for 15 minutes in WT. Granted it's been at least two months since I have played.

But that reminds me, my sticks are getting dusty. I need to clean them via heavy usage.

Edited by Mystere, 29 July 2017 - 06:13 AM.

[Mystere]

Gryphorim, on 29 July 2017 - 05:07 AM, said:

The only way I could see this working is 10 v 12, with matchmaker allowed to make 10 v 10 (all clan) and 12 v 12 (all IS) games when 10 v 12 game can't be found in tier ...

Well, at least one person here gets it.

Cadoazreal, on 29 July 2017 - 05:38 AM, said:

Let me exagerrate what your are suggesting significantly to make it clear why it wont work.

Say you play counterstrike, would you prefer to be on a team with 12 guys only allowed knives and you cant throw them, or the team of 3 with ak47's ? And if you do manage to kill 1 of the 3 with AK's you cant pick the gun up to use against the other 2.

Everyone would want to be on the team with ak's.

Yes, you're right. It's a gross exaggeration that no one is asking for.




<smh>

[Sh0t]

Mystere, on 29 July 2017 - 05:57 AM, said:

The solution to that is forced Clan vs IS, Clan vs. Clan, and IS vs. IS fights based on player availability.

Having said that, Clan Star vs. IS Lance will only be workable on game modes built with that in mind (e.g. Escape and Evasion, Assassination). In fact, we should really be having X Formations vs. Y Formations, depending on game mode and not this X vs. X eSports nonsense.



Think "Escape and Evasion" game mode.



Excitement? Challenge? A change of pace?

I can think of many ways why.



That goes for you too.

I agree with this post the most. The game modes would have to be balanced for the scenario, not just around even battle value for the mechs in question. Timer based survival type modes, or just give scores based on how well the players did as a team, without any "win" or "lose" condition, just xp/gxp/cbills earned in total. Lead to a very different game-theory situation than binary win/loss modes.

[Valhallan]

davoodoo, on 29 July 2017 - 02:44 AM, said:

You assume same tonnage but clans have nowhere near as many assaults as is...

10v12 is fair fight in reality of civil war tech.

timber wolf
BV (2.0) 2,737
nightstar
BV (2.0) 2,399

27370 vs 28788

indeed, but in 3050 only a small portion of is mechs actually had level 2 tech.

so were talking
marauder
BV (2.0) 1,363
warhammer
BV (2.0) 1,299
atlas
BV (2.0) 1,897

with occasional lance equipped with dhs and xl engines.

Tonnage didn't mean as much in TT BV calc (a clan regular turkina is just at 2,944, but a variant can up it to 3,420) since what mattered is what the chassis did with it. You are however forgetting one major thing in your TT BV calculation, IS baseline is Regular at 1.4 pilot multiplier, Clan is Veteran at 1.8. The chassis by itself doesn't usually add that much, but lore fights are usually 5v12 or so because that chassis combined with the clans "superior skill" is what results in lore fights being closer to 5v12 than 10v12 even in civil war. Take your TBR vs NS, accounting for lore clans that TBR is worth 1.5 NS even with that 20 tons difference. In addition IS deployments include a full suite, including scouts, so it's not like there's a full assault lance in there, usually its 1 light lance + 3-4 meds with the rest being a heavy/assault mix. Whereas clans rarely even have 1 light usually.

As for why people would want to play IS, uh what's the difference from 3 months ago? Pre-nutech IS was bottom of the barrel already yet you still have people playing, it's the same reason people bother with urbies, lights and mediums in this heavy mech game. In a 5v12, victory for the regular joe is actually much easier on the IS side since you just have to match a regular skill level, Clans have to match clan skill level and i doubt the hordes mobbing over there actually meet it (you have to maneuver and use your range + mobility advantages to the max, no static play). Even though the IS individual guns are a bit weaker they still have more due to more mechs and more armor too. Well i won't deny the wait time would extend to eternity on the clan end, but as an IS loyalist i actually dun mind being on the more numerous but "weaker" side since i will have a better chance of victory (just 1 clan potato would GG a clan group ).

[m]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 29 July 2017 - 04:29 PM.
name & shame, replies removed

[oldradagast]

Juodas Varnas, on 29 July 2017 - 01:37 AM, said:

LOL, sure dude, let's pit 5 superior mechs against 4 ******** ones.

Totally balanced dude.

Gotta keep Clans superior, because Lore! And then pretend to be a superior warrior when given better equipment - and, in this case - a numbers advantage! Right...

[davoodoo]

Lucian Nostra, on 29 July 2017 - 05:32 AM, said:

12v10 would of been one of those things that PGI would of had to do from the start. You can't just rollback and put 12v10 in now balance has been tinkered with for years to get 12v12 balanced it would take to much more time to get 12v10 going and the cries of IS players seeing Clan mechs getting buffs? Oh lord.. it would be a disaster

On that i actually agree.

Cadoazreal, on 29 July 2017 - 05:38 AM, said:

Let me exagerrate what your are suggesting significantly to make it clear why it wont work.

Say you play counterstrike, would you prefer to be on a team with 12 guys only allowed knives and you cant throw them, or the team of 3 with ak47's ? And if you do manage to kill 1 of the 3 with AK's you cant pick the gun up to use against the other 2.

Everyone would want to be on the team with ak's.

Thats rather poor metaphore...

throw in ct team with oh idk, 12 p90s vs clan team with 5 ak47s and 5 pp19

Edited by davoodoo, 29 July 2017 - 07:48 AM.

[Davegt27]

I never played BattleTech book case game (TT) but from all the other book case games I played like squad leader

skill is proclaimed not earned that is to say top level pilots get a modifier (from a look up table)
this means pilots are closer in performance

basically it is a given that you are an experienced Mech pilot at the start of the engagement

that leaves Mechs, movement, weapons, tactics for the game player to figure out
with all having there own look up tables or dice modifiers

MWO is a pure fire power game (unless they drastically change the game modes)
you basically run in and try to OUT alpha the other Mech or Mechs

a few days ago I saw some cool tactics by a Clan team
on Hellebore springs the Clan used there lights to jump the gate and attack us in our assembly area
we killed all of them and we where ahead
they next hit us with Linebackers and it was down hill from there
we never made it inside the gate

great tactics, they dictated the battle but still it amounted to them out alphaing us

before the new weapons you had to use missiles to get into the 70 damage range (generally speaking)
this is my new TW that I put together



yeah PGI will have to computer hold it back but God help you in FP
it should burn down 90% of the Mechs that run in

unless the Mech durability is changed a lot
things will just go down hill

Edited by Davegt27, 29 July 2017 - 04:03 PM.

[davoodoo]

Mystere, on 29 July 2017 - 05:49 AM, said:

Yep! TT stuff is frowned upon in "A Battletech Game".

The longer i sit on these forums the more i think that
1)yes indeed

but then i quickly start thinking
2)this is not battletech game

its like bf1 being called ww1 game... sure weapons are more or less historical but it just doesnt look like ww1.

Edited by davoodoo, 29 July 2017 - 09:00 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Aggravated Assault Mech, on 29 July 2017 - 01:33 AM, said:

The average IS mech isn't even a match from Clan ton for ton.

5 average players in the average Clan mech vs. 4 average players in the average IS mechs would literally not be worth touching.

i think he means for a 4 v 5 (12(3x4) vs 10(2x5), But we know 12 v 10 wont work,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 29 July 2017 - 10:02 AM.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

I believe its 2 lances against 1 star.

[Andi Nagasia]

Mechwarrior1441491, on 29 July 2017 - 12:11 PM, said:

I believe its 2 lances against 1 star.

8(IS) v 5(Clan)? IS wins hands down, even against Pre Nerfed Clan Mechs,

[Khobai]

if they undid all the recent clan nerfs from the engine nerfs to the civil war nerfs and got rid of some IS quirks...

I think 2 stars vs 3 lances would be more balanced than 12v12 is. I think its okay to slightly favor IS for balance because it forces the clans to overachieve to win. in 12v10 the IS side have a numbers advantage which forces the clan players to play better, and that makes sense from a lore perspective.

12v12 is never gonna be balanced as long as the tech bases arnt exactly equal. at least 12v10 acknowledges that the techbases arnt equal.

Edited by Khobai, 29 July 2017 - 12:40 PM.

[Mechwarrior1441491]

Andi Nagasia, on 29 July 2017 - 12:25 PM, said:

8(IS) v 5(Clan)? IS wins hands down, even against Pre Nerfed Clan Mechs,

Not saying for MWO. That's what it is on table top.

[Zergling]

Mystere, on 29 July 2017 - 05:49 AM, said:

Yep! TT stuff is frowned upon in "A Battletech Game".

TT balance 'stuff' is frowned upon in MWO, because balance in TT is absolutely ****.

And I'm saying that as a long-time TT player.

Mystere, on 29 July 2017 - 06:04 AM, said:

Forced Clan vs. Clan, Clan vs. Clan, and IS vs. IS based on player availability.

Which would lead to Clan vs Clan being overwhelmingly more common than Clan vs IS battles; at that point, the cost/benefit relationship would be against developing anything new for IS.

m, on 29 July 2017 - 07:34 AM, said:

[Redacted]

[Redacted]

Edited by draiocht, 29 July 2017 - 04:34 PM.
Quote Clean-Up, reference

[Burning2nd]

way to much board game talk here... you need to go back to dos