252 replies to this topic

[NocturnalBeast]

Dawn Treader, on 01 September 2017 - 09:25 PM, said:

what i remember from 8v8 is my fullstack 8 stomping pubs with 51 consecutive victories, its a little harder to do that with 12v12
cuase theres usually a 4/8 man that can try to coordinate them. ANd lets be honest 8v8 is just an attept to keep the game alive longer since the cues are horrible, thats all it is

The only ones "pug stomping" were the Lords, and most of the Mech / Weapons that they used have been nerfed. 8v8 in Quick Play will be good, because you will not be against a full 8 man team most of the time,

[MovinTarget]

Ed brings up a good point, did they even split the queue back then? Or was solos versus teams possible? That is where there would be a big difference...

Edited by MovinTarget, 02 September 2017 - 05:48 AM.

[Jetset Quasar]

Ed Steele, on 01 September 2017 - 11:46 PM, said:

The only ones "pug stomping" were the Lords, and most of the Mech / Weapons that they used have been nerfed. 8v8 in Quick Play will be good, because you will not be against a full 8 man team most of the time,

we have difficulty fielding 12 (schedules and all that) we can easily field an 8 and so can every other decently sized unit, it will accomplish nothing but more less that 8s getting punished, been there, done that, seen it.

[Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses]

Dawn Treader, on 02 September 2017 - 05:54 AM, said:

we have difficulty fielding 12 (schedules and all that) we can easily field an 8 and so can every other decently sized unit, it will accomplish nothing but more less that 8s getting punished, been there, done that, seen it.

I am learning English since I was 7 year old, but I am not sure what you've wrote up here... Are you scary about strong 8-member units? Do you think it'll be easy to hold 8 active people to train with them to be the eternal king's of MWO?

MovinTarget, on 02 September 2017 - 02:27 AM, said:

Ed brings up a good point, did they even split the queue back then? Or was solos versus teams possible? That is where there would be a big difference...

Arctic Cheetah or Locust still will be fighter "solo vs team" Locust especially

Edited by Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses, 02 September 2017 - 06:46 AM.

[Pariah Devalis]

Ed Steele, on 01 September 2017 - 11:46 PM, said:

The only ones "pug stomping" were the Lords, and most of the Mech / Weapons that they used have been nerfed. 8v8 in Quick Play will be good, because you will not be against a full 8 man team most of the time,

They did not. It was the wild west, back then. So unlike back then, there would be puggy queue and group queue now. With reconnections possible now. Nearly every single complaint about the 8v8 environment from back then already has an answer in place at this point.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 02 September 2017 - 10:32 AM.

[Jetset Quasar]

Pariah Devalis, on 02 September 2017 - 10:32 AM, said:

They did not. It was the wild west, back then. So unlike back then, there would be puggy queue and group queue now. With reconnections possible now. Nearly every single complaint about the 8v8 environment from back then already has an answer in place at this point.

be careful what you wish for, dont be surprised when the pugs start getting stomped. ALso another wonderful thing that 8v8 brought. People where way more toxic if you died then they are now, now its a walk in the park as 1 loss in 12v12 isnt that big a deal, but in 8v8? Its a very large loss of firepower and bacause of that new played are going to be driven away by the toxicity

Edited by Dawn Treader, 02 September 2017 - 11:52 AM.

[Rhaezor]

My opinion, suggestion: While doing this, mechbays and in the future decorations will be a big part of the game I can sense.
While at it do this:
1 Steam cards
2 Hability do turn cockpit items we dont like into MC/cbills
3 (OR) even better if you can: Steam inventory and trade/sell those items.

You can make easy money with those cards what are you waiting for?

[SuperFunkTron]

Dawn Treader, on 02 September 2017 - 11:52 AM, said:

be careful what you wish for, dont be surprised when the pugs start getting stomped. ALso another wonderful thing that 8v8 brought. People where way more toxic if you died then they are now, now its a walk in the park as 1 loss in 12v12 isnt that big a deal, but in 8v8? Its a very large loss of firepower and bacause of that new played are going to be driven away by the toxicity

You seem to assume that pugs don't get stomped as it is. It happens pretty regularly and death balls are a big part of that. And why would people suddenly be more toxic than they are now? We've already got some really salty, cruel guys out there and I doubt reducing the number of players will either curb or encourage more toxicity than exists now.
And your last argument about losing a mech is really a question of proportions. Losing 1 mech in an 8v8 may come with a larger percentage loss than in a 12 v 12, but you also have a proportionally smaller number of enemy mechs/firepower/armor to be concerned with. Further, the critical mass of mechs it takes to instantly kill a single player who mistakenly tries to flank will be a little more difficult to reach if you only have 8 mechs vs 12 moving together.

I'm not saying that 12v12 doesn't have its own merits, but how about you at least provide some reasonable arguments as to why it is better than 8v8. All you provided was "stomps will start with 8v8" (we already have stomps), "Angry players will be angrier" (there is no reason to think overly aggressive players will suddenly become MORE overly aggressive), and "losing a mech in 8v8 equals guaranteed failure because a single mech is a larger portion of the team" (this one is at least based on math, but it doesn't consider that losing a Locust vs an Atlas doesn't really equate to the same loss of fire power and armor).

I really want to hear good reasons as to why 12 v12 is better, not this emotional "8v8 brings the next apocalypse of MWO" that I've been hearing about since starting this game years ago.

[Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses]

SuperFunkTron, on 02 September 2017 - 02:46 PM, said:

(...)
I really want to hear good reasons as to why 12 v12 is better, not this emotional "8v8 brings the next apocalypse of MWO" that I've been hearing about since starting this game years ago.

So, in spite of I am strongly voting for 8 vs 8 since 12 vs 12 realesed, I'll try to give you some non-emotional, substantive arguments for 12 vs 12, if the other side cannot do that.

1) More people to talk with during the match.
2) The game depends more on teamplay than at solo adventures (well, in QP it's rather disadvantage, but who knows what 12 vs 12 adherents think... and with 8 vs 8 it'll still depends on teamplay)
3) You can hide behind your teammates easier and longer than with 8 people in team and use this shamefull and egoistic tactic to stay alive longer.
.
.
.
PGI, I beg you! Bring 8 vs 8 ASAP !!!

Edited by Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses, 02 September 2017 - 11:08 PM.

[TheFallOfTheReaper]

And devails your argument is invalid, you weren't even in closed beta >_>

[Jetset Quasar]

you guys just dont know what is was like, a lot of you speak of things you never experienced, and experience trumps what you think will happen. History repeats itself

[SuperFunkTron]

ShadowHimself, on 03 September 2017 - 06:10 AM, said:

No 8v8, it's litterally cancer. Math alone settles this argument bro.

It is that type of hysterical, superlative, lack of reasoning that makes it near impossible to take you seriously. Math is a science of application and requires context for it to have meaning. 10+10 doesn't mean a whole lot unless we decide if it is an equation, nomenclature, or if we are dealing with hypothetical or real objects. You are basically telling us "8vs8 is bad because I don't like it because I think its bad" (yes, that is what I mean to type because that is how it is coming off to those looking for legitimate reasons to understand the benefits of 12vs12).

Let me help you by giving you an example that actually APPLIES math to what 12vs12 provides: The need to maintain at least a portion of mechs alive for a longer amount of time, and hopefully provide a high damage output means that an appropriate amount of ammunition needs to be designated for the match. More players means more ammunition will need to be carried which leads to a choice between ammo dependent weapons having longevity vs better heat dissipation and more/heavier weapons. This in itself is a factor that helps maintain the "thinking man's" aspect of Battletech which is good, but is unfortunately only a minor issue in the grand scheme of tactics and thinking.

I hope that helps get you started on more quality responses.

Dawn Treader, on 03 September 2017 - 06:41 AM, said:

you guys just dont know what is was like, a lot of you speak of things you never experienced, and experience trumps what you think will happen. History repeats itself

Out of genuine curiosity, were the matchmaking conditions the same as now or were they different? Also, could you provide more information as to what your bad experience was and what variables may have caused it? I don't think people are questioning your experience so much as they are trying to understand why you experienced it that way and what possible differences there are this time around.

I am glad that PGI plans to do a trial 8vs8 period to test the system out and see if achieves the intended goals. I think it's similar to what scouting brought with its 4vs4 lights and mediums style and will end up with a chunk of population loving it, a part being neutral, and a part that loathes it, just like Invasion in FP. A middle ground between all the modes, especially one that helps better delineate FP from QP seems like a reasonable plan, but the execution will be what determines if it is a valid one.


I really hope that we can get more well based arguments for 12vs12 here soon. I am open to both options, but I am not finding much reason for a staunch defense of 12vs12 and would really like to have more good reason to compare it to 8vs8.

[Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses]

Dawn Treader, on 03 September 2017 - 06:41 AM, said:

you guys just dont know what is was like, a lot of you speak of things you never experienced, and experience trumps what you think will happen. History repeats itself

Man, you shoud wrote about yourself.
Or, maybe you've wrote about yourself already...?

SuperFunkTron, on 03 September 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:

(...)
I really hope that we can get more well based arguments for 12vs12 here soon. I am open to both options, but I am not finding much reason for a staunch defense of 12vs12 and would really like to have more good reason to compare it to 8vs8.

@Edit - wow, I answered to you personally again, SuperFunk Tron. I have noticed that after the fact

The only argument for 12 vs 12 is the firepower go less % with one dead guy than in 8 vs 8 (what you have wrote already). But it's simplified calculations. There is many, many more that have greater influence than one or two weak players in team, like: type of piloted mech, the tonnage, the loadout, the speed of mechs in team, well or badly shooting players, focusing fire etc. etc.
I remember well that we could defend in 6 players against 8 and win the match at the end, in pugs battle without any commander. That situation repeats often. Wow, but math say we couldn't, isn't it, ShadowHimself...?

MWO have a balance and gameplay engine that works better for smaller groups. It's not a Planetside 2. This game is slower, requires more thinking, patient and well calculated moves than other shooters. And still, matches can be very dynamic. That's why I love this game so much. Even if it is frustrating sometimes

Edited by Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses, 03 September 2017 - 09:41 AM.

[MovinTarget]

So if TTL is a consideration, wouldn't 8v8 have better TTL since the best case scenario is 8 mechs focusing rather than 12?

Even if its all pugs, you stand a better chance to survive the first few minutes unless you yolo...

Again with all pugs, it might actually be easier to herd 8 cats than 12...

[Fox the Apprentice]

Fox the Apprentice, on 31 August 2017 - 05:06 AM, said:

[...]
I'm not saying it's a good way to have it implemented
[...]

W E N D I G O, on 31 August 2017 - 07:42 AM, said:

[...]
When you think about your "example" you should realize how stupid such a solution would be - a 3d polygon on top of a 3d polygon, both with separately run animation cycles which have to be the same in the end?
[...]

Please read my post before attacking me.

Edited by Fox the Apprentice, 03 September 2017 - 12:12 PM.

[Pariah Devalis]

ShadowHimself, on 03 September 2017 - 06:15 AM, said:

And devails your argument is invalid, you weren't even in closed beta >_>

What makes you think that, buddy? Even if, hypothetically, I was not in closed beta, 8v8 was well into open beta. Your argument against when I started playing the game as a poor attempt to discredit me is so beyond flawed it is absolutely laughable. So, please, go to the corner and think about a valid argument besides "the maths" and failures at making false arguments against the person. Argue the argument, not the speakers. Especially when you are off base about the person. Construct a logical argument, then come back.

FYI: Open Beta was October 29, 2012. My forum profile states I started in November... of 2011. GG no re.

While we are in the business of trying to discredit posters you disagree with, look very closely at your publicly viewable stats. It might be indicative of your inability to grasp the finer details of the game, let alone pass judgement on what should or should not work within its environment. Even if you were in the Closed Beta. I would be very careful about going down this path with anyone, anytime soon, ShadowHimself. You live in a glass house. Do not throw rocks.

Though to be fair, the initial version of MWO did not click with me, and I decided to put it down for a good 8 months or so to let it develop more. When I came back, it was around a month or three until we went Open Beta.

SuperFunkTron, on 03 September 2017 - 07:38 AM, said:

Let me help you by giving you an example that actually APPLIES math to what 12vs12 provides: The need to maintain at least a portion of mechs alive for a longer amount of time, and hopefully provide a high damage output means that an appropriate amount of ammunition needs to be designated for the match. More players means more ammunition will need to be carried which leads to a choice between ammo dependent weapons having longevity vs better heat dissipation and more/heavier weapons. This in itself is a factor that helps maintain the "thinking man's" aspect of Battletech which is good, but is unfortunately only a minor issue in the grand scheme of tactics and thinking.

A good argument in theory. In practice, when it went from 8v8 to 12v12, very little actually changed from an ammo consumption standpoint. While there are, indeed, more mechs to kill, there are also a proportionately equal number of allied mechs dealing damage. As a result, the proportion of damage any one mech had to inflict relative to its team stayed the same. Even now, the ammo necessary for a 4v4 in scouting is only about half a ton shy of appropriate for 12v12, and even then you can manage just fine.

Edited by Pariah Devalis, 03 September 2017 - 10:33 PM.

[Aramuside]

Bigbacon, on 25 August 2017 - 04:42 PM, said:

if you do this 8v8 test...I will just stop playing until 12v12 comes back. NOTHING good can come of 8v8 in QP.

You mean what we used to have?

Pariah Devalis, on 26 August 2017 - 05:26 PM, said:

Or even less. People focus on the bad, but ignore that one good pilot can swing with much more effect in a smaller match. Games worked fairly well back in the day, even without the ability to reconnect. Something we have now.

Amen, I always felt like I could swing a win if I played really well and I'm sure others felt the same.

[Aramuside]

ShadowHimself, on 03 September 2017 - 06:10 AM, said:

No 8v8, it's litterally cancer. Math alone settles this argument bro.

That makes no sense at all. Try constructing an argument rather than using a random sentence generator.

[SuperFunkTron]

So I was playing a few 8v8 matches last night and found a few interesting differences.

1. Space- There was s much more space in which to move around without bumping into allies! It also opened up firing lanes and made for easier analysis of a battlefront and how an individual player could squeeze in between allied firing points or sweep around the edges.

2. Tactics- This one is obviously a bit subjective and relative to the experience of those implementing them, but on a variety of maps, even very large ones, objective based maps became much more interesting. With fewer mechs on the map, mech roles were defined much more clearly and allowed for more interesting set ups and positioning.

3. Forgiveness- this ties into tactics and space, but it is a confirmation of the forgiveness of cornering or having enemies corner on you. Because of the extra space, enemies split into smaller groups which allowed for less devastating initial contacts and help draw the battles out. If you were in a light mech, you actually could utilize your agility to help you get out of bad situations either alive or with more armor than in the usual 12 man (this is a generalization, not an absolute).

4. Death balling- Death balls are a tactic that will recur no matter how many players you have in a game, but it was clear that the efficiency of it was much more reliant on tactical positioning and movement. With space, it works beautifully as an overwhelm tactic. However, the reduced size of the death ball allows the opposing team to utilize counter tactics more efficiently as a result of the points listed above. More space allows better tactical use of positioning while the reduced number of guns on you makes small mistakes much more forgiving on both sides of the equation.

5. Armor- Armor feels more like armor. With fewer guns aimed at you, you could take a volley of fire and still have armor available, which was incredibly refreshing.


This can all be boiled down to: With 8vs8, fewer mechs felt like it lead to bigger game play. Stomps still happened, even with comparable teams, but the option for individual and cooperative tactics were both functional and the all around game play felt better. I think part of it could be the fact that you don't have an excess of mechs on the map which means that fights have a chance to more organically develop.

I want to go into more detail explaining the subtleties I experienced, but I would be rambling for an hour. 12vs12 definitely has a place in this game, but 8vs8 seems much more able to foster interesting game play and allow players to develop more in each match as action and consequence is more a result of choice than luck.

[Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses]

SuperFunkTron, on 04 September 2017 - 07:14 AM, said:

So I was playing a few 8v8 matches last night and found a few interesting differences.

1. Space- There was s much more space in which to move around without bumping into allies! It also opened up firing lanes and made for easier analysis of a battlefront and how an individual player could squeeze in between allied firing points or sweep around the edges.

2. Tactics- This one is obviously a bit subjective and relative to the experience of those implementing them, but on a variety of maps, even very large ones, objective based maps became much more interesting. With fewer mechs on the map, mech roles were defined much more clearly and allowed for more interesting set ups and positioning.

3. Forgiveness- this ties into tactics and space, but it is a confirmation of the forgiveness of cornering or having enemies corner on you. Because of the extra space, enemies split into smaller groups which allowed for less devastating initial contacts and help draw the battles out. If you were in a light mech, you actually could utilize your agility to help you get out of bad situations either alive or with more armor than in the usual 12 man (this is a generalization, not an absolute).

4. Death balling- Death balls are a tactic that will recur no matter how many players you have in a game, but it was clear that the efficiency of it was much more reliant on tactical positioning and movement. With space, it works beautifully as an overwhelm tactic. However, the reduced size of the death ball allows the opposing team to utilize counter tactics more efficiently as a result of the points listed above. More space allows better tactical use of positioning while the reduced number of guns on you makes small mistakes much more forgiving on both sides of the equation.

5. Armor- Armor feels more like armor. With fewer guns aimed at you, you could take a volley of fire and still have armor available, which was incredibly refreshing.


This can all be boiled down to: With 8vs8, fewer mechs felt like it lead to bigger game play. Stomps still happened, even with comparable teams, but the option for individual and cooperative tactics were both functional and the all around game play felt better. I think part of it could be the fact that you don't have an excess of mechs on the map which means that fights have a chance to more organically develop.

I want to go into more detail explaining the subtleties I experienced, but I would be rambling for an hour. 12vs12 definitely has a place in this game, but 8vs8 seems much more able to foster interesting game play and allow players to develop more in each match as action and consequence is more a result of choice than luck.

Wow, I was writing it even before 12vs12 appeared. Not here, at foum in my country. Two years ago. That post still exist. However, I wish there is option "Love This" except "Like This".

PGI, why are you waiting? Put 8 vs 8 as soon as possible!

Mechs are big. Too big to run in large groups. Big warrior should have impact for events on the battlefield. I almost don't feel it with 11 more big warriors at same side. With 8 guys - I felt it.

~~~

Today someone wrote in game as answer to me, when I wrote about coming lucky days (8vs8):

"With 8 guys the chance you will receive one or two good players which leads your team to victory is even smaller", or something like that.
Hell yea! That was after I played 5 or 6 lost stomps in a raw. So I don't think that chances will have any matter, if with 12 ppl I haven't get any proper guy several times in a row. Sure, you can wrote "math says that!". Sure. But read the topic, some wise players, which opted for 8vs8, had explained it already, why it's not true.

If you want to use math, use it properly. Take into account all factors, or that factors which provide to results that have something to do with reality. If you count that chances to get skilled player will decrease, consider: it works for both sides, it also means that chances to get weak player/troll/potatoe decreases... Ehh, everything has been wrote already, that thread should be consistent now. Consistent and closed.


PGI, please! Bring back 8 vs 8... I've got tired of writing it. All has been written already. We have to wait for that improvement patiently now...

Edited by Cherry Garden full of Blue Roses, 04 September 2017 - 09:02 AM.