134 replies to this topic

[MadRover]

El Bandito, on 23 August 2017 - 06:55 PM, said:

Nope. It is much easier to carry in 8v8 than 12v12. Me killing 4 mechs does far more contirbution in 8v8 than 12v12.

This is another issue. I don't believe one person in the entire team should have the ability to carry teams all by them lonesome because then it will start to create an elitist attitude.

[MrMadguy]

Sorry, but no. 12vs12 means more focusing, rush'n'smash tactics and stomping. 8vs8 was so much more enjoyable back then. And of course 8vs8 means, that we will be able to return old great maps back into rotation and get rid of such crap, as Polar, new River and Forest, etc.

[poltergoost]

Transmasculine Housemouse, on 23 August 2017 - 07:49 PM, said:

TL;DR: If I wanted to play some ******** competitive game, I wouldn't be playing MWO. I'd play LoL, Smite, Paragon, etc. Keep that out of my strategic, giant stompy robots.

Pretty much sums it up for me.

If PGI want to force me to play a MOBA or Arena FPS, there are far better games to choose from in those genres than MWO.

[El Bandito]

MadRover, on 23 August 2017 - 08:25 PM, said:

This is another issue. I don't believe one person in the entire team should have the ability to carry teams all by them lonesome because then it will start to create an elitist attitude.

What game are you playing? We already have plenty of elitist attitude in MWO, which was increased the moment tier system went up. 8v8 will not make that any worse. With better MM resulting from 8v8, you will actually see more balanced matches, and less scrubs getting insulted by those who know how to play the game.

Less pugs to yell at = less elitist attitude.

Edited by El Bandito, 23 August 2017 - 09:11 PM.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

8v8 gives you longer TtK, less blob of death, more maneuver tactics, more room for individual skill to contribute toward success, less room for individual fail to contribute toward failure, and in general is far friendlier to casual players and small groups.

12v12 gives far shorter TtK, requires blob, punishes alternative tactics, makes individual skill less meaningful for victory, makes individual failure more meaningful as the snowball effect is heightened, and in general is far harsher to casual players and small groups.

[QuantumButler]

12 v 12 is the worst thing to ever happen to MWO.

[Lucifaust]

I prefer big, crazy mech battles with enemies and allies pouring in from everywhere so
no 8 v 8 for me.

[poltergoost]

Well, with the strong opinions on either side, it looks like PGI is going to anger a lot of players no matter what it does.

As someone who has mainly played fast lights from the start, there is no way I'm going to stick around if 'tiny 8v8 maps' is the way forward, as being suggested by many on here. Not a chance.

Whats the point of running 160kph in a shoebox?

And seriously, with all the DC/AFK problems we are having, 8v8 would be a joke. 1 single DC/AFK on your team, and you may as well DC/AFK yourself. Waste of time.

[El Bandito]

poltergoost, on 23 August 2017 - 09:34 PM, said:

Well, with the strong opinions on either side, it looks like PGI is going to anger a lot of players no matter what it does.

As someone who has mainly played fast lights from the start, there is no way I'm going to stick around if 'tiny 8v8 maps' is the way forward, as being suggested by many on here. Not a chance.

Whats the point of running 160kph in a shoebox?

That's one big false assumption people have. It was never about how big the map is, it was always about how much of the map is being used. Even in the old Frozen City with its tiny size, far more of the map was used, such as the tunnel and the underside of the cliff--combined with less mechs to detect you in 8v8, Lights were doing just fine in that map.

Newer maps are big, but the actions always happen at only select few spots because 12v12 encouraged even more balling up behavior. Thankfully with 8v8 there will be more freedom to maneuver and more of those maps will be used.

As bonus, there will be less strikes to go around.

Edited by El Bandito, 23 August 2017 - 09:49 PM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

DAYLEET, on 23 August 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

I have not kept track of anything unofficial.

You mean the stuff that lead to the creation of PGI's "official" comp stuff and has been the basis for most of their rules? I mean PGI certainly wouldn't have chosen Conquest for the comp game mode if they hadn't bothered to confer with comp leagues, from what I understand they were expecting everyone (including comp players) to all fall in love with Incursion and preferred that to be the comp mode.

DAYLEET, on 23 August 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

I did mean Incursion yes. You're blaming the people

I'm not blaming people, that's a jump in logic you are making. I'm saying given a level of coordination there are certain things you should expect and then there are bad expectations. Expecting depth in solo queue for a game that is very much team centric is asinine. Now if you are talking about group queue, then you might have a better case.

DAYLEET, on 23 August 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

Conquest works, iu dunno why you say it doesnt. But now that PGI allows games with 5 assault and 4 heavies per team... yeah, the game mode can seem out of place. removal of 3/3/3/3 Is another one of our great compromise of making the game worse now while bleed more people away in return of... faster drop? aint downward spiral fun!

3/3/3/3 doesn't make conquest work in PUGs. QP could be nothing but Skirmish and honestly it would be better for it because objectives tend to require more coordination than you will ever find in solo queue to actually teach people how to play the mode.

DAYLEET, on 23 August 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

You're blaming the people again. Players aint the problem. Its either the implementation of the game mode, the given maps for the game mode or you accepting that you cant control everyone at all time.

I'm not blaming people, I'm explaining why Conquest doesn't actually work because it doesn't really teach people how best to play it (map control, it's all about map control).

DAYLEET, on 23 August 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

NAh. I was just making a point of differentiating comp from pugs. Because we keep using comp mode as an example but they dont relate really.

They do relate, the OP was talking about depth of 12v12 vs 8v8. When you are talking about depth, you can't ignore comp because that is where you will find the actual depth. QP is never going to be this deep game mode because of the very nature of it. Diverse skill levels with diverse mech choices with no sort of coordination means there will never be true depth (there is a reason that comp players have to be careful in solo queue to not pick up bad habits). You can't be a good QP player and immediately go into comp and be good but the opposite is true, there is a reason for that.

Edited by Quicksilver Kalasa, 23 August 2017 - 09:53 PM.

[DAYLEET]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 23 August 2017 - 09:52 PM, said:

You mean the stuff that lead to the creation of PGI's "official" comp stuff and has been the basis for most of their rules? I mean PGI certainly wouldn't have chosen Conquest for the comp game mode if they hadn't bothered to confer with comp leagues, from what I understand they were expecting everyone (including comp players) to all fall in love with Incursion and preferred that to be the comp mode.


I'm not blaming people, that's a jump in logic you are making. I'm saying given a level of coordination there are certain things you should expect and then there are bad expectations. Expecting depth in solo queue for a game that is very much team centric is asinine. Now if you are talking about group queue, then you might have a better case.


3/3/3/3 doesn't make conquest work in PUGs. QP could be nothing but Skirmish and honestly it would be better for it because objectives tend to require more coordination than you will ever find in solo queue to actually teach people how to play the mode.


I'm not blaming people, I'm explaining why Conquest doesn't actually work because it doesn't really teach people how best to play it (map control, it's all about map control).


They do relate, the OP was talking about depth of 12v12 vs 8v8. When you are talking about depth, you can't ignore comp because that is where you will find the actual depth. QP is never going to be this deep game mode because of the very nature of it. Diverse skill levels with diverse mech choices with no sort of coordination means there will never be true depth (there is a reason that comp players have to be careful in solo queue to not pick up bad habits). You can't be a good QP player and immediately go into comp and be good but the opposite is true, there is a reason for that.

I dont know if pgi copied something made by the community but its telling theres so very little people interested in it.

Conquest has been working since when i first played it. It certainly has not been working as good since half the people cant remove it from their choice. Blame the voting system for the people who dont give two **** about game modes. They are not bads or stupid or uneducated about how to play, they couldnt careless and you cant force them. Dont blame the game mode, blame the delivery. What kind of dumb game forces people to play an objective game when they want to play tdm? Another one of our great compromise ladies and gentlemen, easing up the descent on the downward spiral. thanks for reminding me how much better we had it in conquest before. the overall quality of gameplay has gone down the ******* over the years thanks to all the great compromises.

3/3/3/3 makes everyting in mwo better and more balanced. It just make sense to have 3 of each weight.

[Johnny Z]

DAYLEET, on 23 August 2017 - 10:30 PM, said:

I dont know if pgi copied something made by the community but its telling theres so very little people interested in it.

Conquest has been working since when i first played it. It certainly has not been working as good since half the people cant remove it from their choice. Blame the voting system for the people who dont give two **** about game modes. They are not bads or stupid or uneducated about how to play, they couldnt careless and you cant force them. Dont blame the game mode, blame the delivery. What kind of dumb game forces people to play an objective game when they want to play tdm? Another one of our great compromise ladies and gentlemen, easing up the descent on the downward spiral. thanks for reminding me how much better we had it in conquest before. the overall quality of gameplay has gone down the ******* over the years thanks to all the great compromises.

3/3/3/3 makes everyting in mwo better and more balanced. It just make sense to have 3 of each weight.

I remember 3/3/3/3 being such a huge topic for quite a while and how the match maker would slow match creation to try make teams consisting of all the weight classes roughly equally.

With balance improving so much and everything else it now seems like such a silly topic.

Just commenting on how times change and how some subjects relevance also changes. 3/3/3/3 is still ideal but not really as important as it seemed before.

This number of players per match subject is a lot more important that is for sure.

Again I think 12 v 12 is great. I think that 4 v 4 scouting matches are also great even if they could possibly be put in the same queue as other faction play modes and players enter these randomly possibly.

16 v 16 would be epic. 1 v 1 would add something entirely different. Npc's tanks and air craft, land mines and all sorts of things would add a lot to the game as well. Maybe even 8 v 8 would be ok for some matches also.

Edited by Johnny Z, 23 August 2017 - 10:53 PM.

[Lily from animove]

Bud Crue, on 23 August 2017 - 02:02 PM, said:

Seriously? Murder ball with the normal 1 disco, 1 guy running off on his own, and the 1 ever helpful narc/scout mech dropping narcs and uavs while you are still at 1500m, over and over is "inovative and experienceful"?

on the other side, having 2 people disco and one running off in a 8vs8 has a even more bigger impact on the match. So both has it's ups and downs.

@Johnny,

Well when we had that strange 1/1/1/1 Lance event event games were actually great because the mix of mechs made the game way more interesting.

Edited by Lily from animove, 23 August 2017 - 10:54 PM.

[Curccu]

DAYLEET, on 23 August 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

I have not kept track of anything unofficial.

DAYLEET, on 23 August 2017 - 10:30 PM, said:

I dont know if pgi copied something made by the community but its telling theres so very little people interested in it.

If you are totally clueless about it how do you know there are very little people interested in it?

[DAYLEET]

Curccu, on 23 August 2017 - 11:50 PM, said:

If you are totally clueless about it how do you know there are very little people interested in it?

Not clueless about in game comp mode used for pgi official championship. you can see the team in it, their track record.

[Frantic Fire]

Less people humping my backside when i'm hill peeking? Yes please. I don't recall running into teammates constantly or having my shots blocked half the match when we had 8v8.

If they do revert it back to 8v8 hopefully they'll give the payouts we had before they changed it for 12v12.

[rollermint]

Bud Crue, on 23 August 2017 - 02:02 PM, said:

Seriously? Murder ball with the normal 1 disco, 1 guy running off on his own, and the 1 ever helpful narc/scout mech dropping narcs and uavs while you are still at 1500m, over and over is "inovative and experienceful"?

8 mechs are more than enough to murder ball anyway.

Anyway I'd prefer 12vs12 remain an option for QP. I like the chaos. I want a battle, not a skirmish. The bigger, the better I'm more of a Battlefield/Planetside guy than a Counterstrike guy.

The best is of course, both options open to all. BUt PGI and this community have this "my way or the highway" attitude.

Edited by rollermint, 24 August 2017 - 12:39 AM.

[Alistair Winter]

Natred, on 23 August 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

Please for the love of all that is holy and awesome do no go down to 8 vs 8 for quick play.

12 vs 12
More people means more tactics and strategy

Only if:
1) The players actually play differently in 12v12 than in 8v8, which they normally don't unless they have amazing drop commanders.
2) The maps actually allow the players to make use of their numbers to carry out different tactics and strategies than would otherwise be possible, which they often don't.

Natred, on 23 August 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

More inovative and experienceful drops

I see no evidence of extra innovation, as explained above. And the matches would only be more "experienceful" if they gave the average player more minutes per hour, playing in their own mech, which they almost certainly don't, due to decreased TTK and increased waiting time after your mech is killed.

Natred, on 23 August 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

Higher chance of being surprised by the random unaccounted for enemy.

And smaller chance of lone mechs actually making a difference, which is part of the reason why teams tend to stick together.

Natred, on 23 August 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

More fun and complex

Fun is relative. Increased complexity only happens if players take advantage of the numbers. How complex is this?
https://youtu.be/EXqcYr8Mxn0?t=4m32s

Natred, on 23 August 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

More strategy in 12 vs 12. More mechs to damage so more c bills to make

More c-bills per match is not the same as more c-bills per hour. And honestly, c-bills per hour is not a good metric of how much fun I'm having.

Natred, on 23 August 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

Invigorating to hardcore gamers

Is this a true scotsman argument? I don't find 12v12 invigorating.

Edited by Alistair Winter, 24 August 2017 - 12:48 AM.

[UnofficialOperator]

MadRover, on 23 August 2017 - 08:25 PM, said:

This is another issue. I don't believe one person in the entire team should have the ability to carry teams all by them lonesome because then it will start to create an elitist attitude.

Just remove all stats. Problem solved.

[meteorol]

Natred, on 23 August 2017 - 01:52 PM, said:

Still going to be pub stomping newbs in less than 2 minutes- matchmaker would fix this or an overhaul to the tier system

As if there was a considerable amount of new players in this game.