92 replies to this topic

[m]

Hello everyone,

This is a discussion page of the POLL of the same title in the Feature Suggestion section.

Thanks for your time

[Wing 0]

Not happening. Been talked about already.

[Davegt27]

would not work anyways

that's TT stuff

[Aggravated Assault Mech]

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.

[MustrumRidcully]

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 current faction-free quick play avoids any problems with population imbalances, by allowing mixed matches.

The real goal should be to have the same thing in Faction Play, too. Civil War would be the perfect excuse for that.

[Juodas Varnas]

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

Totally balanced dude.

[Nema Nabojiv]

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

[m]

Well I guess I'm the minority in stating that I enjoy a tactical challenge. I bet you all wouldn't mind it if you tried it. Kind of like Jell-o when you were a kid..looked funny but was great after trying it.

Edited by m, 29 July 2017 - 01:52 AM.

[WildeKarde]

Clan always went the other way in the game and the took 5 vs 8 IS mechs or 10 vs 12 IS mechs.
I suppose scouting mode could be amended to the 5 vs 8 option for a "tactical" challenge

[davoodoo]

It could work if it was company of 3 lances vs binary of 2 stars.

or assault company of 4 lances vs trinary of 3 stars, ofc higher tonnage for is with a majority of heavy/assault mechs.

Edited by davoodoo, 29 July 2017 - 02:23 AM.

[Marius Evander]

OP no.

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

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

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

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.

IS mechs beat Clan mechs with LFE and Quirks.

[Nema Nabojiv]

davoodoo, on 29 July 2017 - 02:17 AM, said:

It could work if it was company of 3 lances vs binary of 2 stars.

or assault company of 4 lances vs trinary of 3 stars, ofc higher tonnage for is with a majority of heavy/assault mechs.

and why would anyone want to play that?

[davoodoo]

Nema Nabojiv, on 29 July 2017 - 02:25 AM, said:

and why would anyone want to play that?

Because its typical structure for tt and would allow clan mechs to actually be superior to is mechs as it is in fluff without imbalancing the game...

You know

a battletech game...

Edited by davoodoo, 29 July 2017 - 02:28 AM.

[Valhallan]

davoodoo, on 29 July 2017 - 02:26 AM, said:

Because its typical structure for tt and would allow clan mechs to actually be superior to is mechs as it is in fluff without imbalancing the game...

Wat, typical structure in TT (and lore) is 5v12 for a fair fight, 10v12 is just the equivalent in organizational terms not combat/lore.

[Ruslan Savelyev]

I'm not at all familiar with TT rules for the current tech level, but original balance circa 3050(I'm not going into BV) was roughly 2 IS Lances to a single Clan Star. There was never a point in this timeline where a single IS Lance would have been matched with a Clan Star, short of some ridiculous 4 assaults vs 5 mediums scenario.

[davoodoo]

Valhallan, on 29 July 2017 - 02:34 AM, said:

Wat, typical structure in TT (and lore) is 5v12 for a fair fight, 10v12 is just the equivalent in organizational terms not combat/lore.

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

Ruslan Savelyev, on 29 July 2017 - 02:40 AM, said:

I'm not at all familiar with TT rules for the current tech level, but original balance circa 3050(I'm not going into BV) was roughly 2 IS Lances to a single Clan Star. There was never a point in this timeline where a single IS Lance would have been matched with a Clan Star, short of some ridiculous 4 assaults vs 5 mediums scenario.

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.

Edited by davoodoo, 29 July 2017 - 02:50 AM.

[lEAKYcUBe]

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

[davoodoo]

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.....

Really??

matchmaking is roll of dice and thats the major factor of whether you win or lose...

Edited by davoodoo, 29 July 2017 - 02:53 AM.

[Zergling]

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.

Edited by Zergling, 29 July 2017 - 03:05 AM.

[davoodoo]

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

Lol no, this is a terrible idea that has been argued about and determined to be garbage numerous 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.
In case you can't work it out, that is a severe problem for any kind of matchmaker.

Imo it would be self fixing as soon as you put predicted q times for both clans and is.

clans 5:00 is 0:10, **** it im gonna play is.