154 replies to this topic

[Dr Hobo]

I'd be legitimately curious to see how MWO handles with the big reticle(where all your shots landed inside it) AND reticle sway from mech movement. Not too severe mind you,just enough so you know youre in a 100t vehicle.

Mechs also need to be smaller,way too many mechs are way too tall.

Uziel still needs proper animations(that would probably help a lot since it walks in a very squat and different way)

[Grus]

Bohxim, on 14 December 2017 - 02:54 AM, said:

Last time I did this, I was called a cheating bi*ch. No matter it was my first headshot in 2 weeks

ive had great luck with dual heavy gauss to the face over normal gauss. Too many times I've hit with normal and it just goes to orange.

[ROSS-128]

Luck doesn't really have anything to do with that. 18 head armor and 15 structure = 3HP left after a dual gauss hit.

A dual gauss hit to the head is basically a helmet check. If you didn't put your helmet on, your head gets popped and it's your own fault.

[Y E O N N E]

Dual HGauss no care about your head armor.

[YueFei]

ROSS-128, on 15 December 2017 - 12:53 PM, said:

Luck doesn't really have anything to do with that. 18 head armor and 15 structure = 3HP left after a dual gauss hit.

A dual gauss hit to the head is basically a helmet check. If you didn't put your helmet on, your head gets popped and it's your own fault.

Can't you still get one-shot by dual Gauss to the head, even with full armor, due to crit damage transfer? Or did they change that? It used to be 15%, so 15% of 15 damage is 2.25. With a double crit (~14% chance?) it would be 4.5 damage, or a triple crit (~3% chance?) it would be 6.75 damge. So a 17% chance that on a dual gauss head hit, it crits hard enough to kill you anyway.

I know I got killed by dual-gauss headshot in a fully armored head on Alpine once, long ago, back before the skill tree.

Now with skill tree applying bonuses to armor and structure, taking the maximum for armor and structure, I am safe from a dual gauss head hit one-shot-KO. But yeah a dual heavy gauss to the head is still lights out GG.

[Anjian]

Asym, on 12 December 2017 - 07:51 AM, said:

Hey crew ! News flash: PGI must, not should, elongate TTK for Solaris to work. They don't have a choice. What are all of the idiotic nerfs for, Hmmmm? To make Solaris last longer per match..... They need to make Solaris last 5 to 8+ minutes per match. Longer is more profitable.

If TTK shortens, NO ONE WILL PLAY.....

Right now, average players aren't going to last more than a few weeks at best in Solaris. We get farmed everywhere and Solaris 1x1, 2x2 is a nightmare coming up.... PGI has known that for a very long while. Solaris is why a lot of players have left: many of us predicted this in April and May and entire teams departed MWO because "team centric" play is dead to focus on Solaris. PGI is banking on Solaris. HBS is the exit route for those disposed to lore and team play....... e-Sports will center on Solaris and how PGI incorporates "teams" into that is the operative question...

We were right in the beginning of 2017 and I'd bet we're right now. I'm only one left in MWO and when Solaris drops, well, I'm not sure because I love this game and maybe, PGI will get "something" right............

I saw this quote from another game forum where that game has been increasingly criticized for its growth in high alpha and burst damage of late, and is failing in counterplay. This quote comes from the developers of one, if not, the most successful, massive PvP online arena ever made about the sheer value of counterplay.

Quote

League of Legends Developers Blog:

Rich and exciting fights need to be two-sided, not one-sided. In order to dominate your opponent, you need to consistently outplay them, not just pull off that one perfect kill. League isn’t won at champion select and no phase of the game should be decided before a team steps up to fight. We strive to ensure a player's decisions, actions, and reactions matter.

While counterplay is a type of meaningful choice, it’s so important to League of Legends as a competitive multiplayer game that we consider it a pillar of our design values. A fight loses its excitement if the first punch wins – it's what you can do after that adds depth and complexity. We try to prevent hard counters and abilities with no room for reaction, as no game should be over without a real show of skill.

I would think that in all the years, failure to adhere to such principles is what keeps MWO in the minor leagues.

Edited by Anjian, 20 December 2017 - 03:11 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

League isn’t won at champion select

MWO is lol

if one team gets gud assault mech and other team gets bad assault mech, GG.

[Jetset Quasar]

battletech has never been a quick TTK universe, go back to your twitch shooters this is a different beast entirely

[Invictus XVII]

The reason newer players lose, is because they make exceptionally dumb decisions. Infact i know a few in the upper tiers that does the same dumb moves over and over - since the tier system is in no way an indicator of skill - People do the same mistakes over and over.

This game require you to think of your team as pieces on a chess game and try to predict moves ahead - that method of thinking isnt normally present in millenials (newer players) Due to being spoonfed games like tf2, call of duty and battlefield game series, where its all just chaotic quick "fun" where intelligence gives an optional small bonus to the endscore, but not required to perform well. Where you get first place medals for participating. That stuff doesnt fly in MWO.

Edited by Invictus XVII, 20 December 2017 - 04:24 AM.

[TWIAFU]

Khobai, on 11 December 2017 - 07:34 PM, said:

the problem isnt that good players are beating new players.

the problem is that good players are playing new players in the first place. why is that still a thing?

good players should play other good players

new players should play other new players until theyre good players

fix your matchmaker PGI, if there even is one...

They must change it immediately so that you can ONLY play someone in your tier or one higher, never lower.

Wait times be damned.

[Daggett]

Asym, on 12 December 2017 - 07:51 AM, said:

Hey crew ! News flash: PGI must, not should, elongate TTK for Solaris to work. They don't have a choice. What are all of the idiotic nerfs for, Hmmmm? To make Solaris last longer per match..... They need to make Solaris last 5 to 8+ minutes per match. Longer is more profitable.

If TTK shortens, NO ONE WILL PLAY.....

Right now, average players aren't going to last more than a few weeks at best in Solaris. We get farmed everywhere and Solaris 1x1, 2x2 is a nightmare coming up.... PGI has known that for a very long while. Solaris is why a lot of players have left: many of us predicted this in April and May and entire teams departed MWO because "team centric" play is dead to focus on Solaris. PGI is banking on Solaris. HBS is the exit route for those disposed to lore and team play....... e-Sports will center on Solaris and how PGI incorporates "teams" into that is the operative question...

We were right in the beginning of 2017 and I'd bet we're right now. I'm only one left in MWO and when Solaris drops, well, I'm not sure because I love this game and maybe, PGI will get "something" right............

So many assumptions, so few proof.

Why are longer Solaris matches better or more profitable? Having FP with 20+ minute matches and QP with 7-8 min average match-time, wouldn't it be smarter to make a duel mode cater to players who want even less match-time especially when fewer mechs are involved?

I see no problem with let's say 3 minute-matches, in fact i would be a target audience (although i'm more a fan of team-dynamics than duels). And if consumables are allowed shorter match-times are a better cbill-sink than longer ones.
I think PGI intends to make the real money from the bolt-on cosmetics and whatever interesting stuff they might add as well in the revamped lootboxes.

BTW, TTK has not increased significantly over time. For a very long time the average QP match is often decided within 5 minutes of fighting. Then you add a few mins for finishing off any survivors and for walking time on bigger maps like Polar, but both have nothing to do with TTK.

TTK only seem to have increased since 8v8 with bigger maps being released which require more 'boring' walking time, but i bet the numbers tell a different story.

Personally i'm totally fine with current TTK times. Maybe some specific alpha-limitations like on laser-vomit would help to prevent getting wrecked too fast, but apart from those outliers it feels good for me overall.

Players leaving because they predicted some Solaris-scheme related to TTK before Solaris was even announced sound very odd and far from being rational to me. I'm pretty sure there are more logical reasons why they left. Maybe you are referring to the fear that FP get's left to die in favor for Solaris. That may be the case, but has nothing to do with TTK.

Khobai, on 20 December 2017 - 02:58 AM, said:

if one team gets gud assault mech and other team gets bad assault mech, GG.

Not in my experience. What matters much more is team dynamic, communication and how the skilled pilots are distributed.

I'd rather have bear_cl4w or B33F on my side in a locust than an average player in a Deathstrike.
I'd rather have a player in an Atlas who knows when and how to push than someone in a large laser Supernova sniping alone way behind the front while i have to tank the damage in an urbie.
I'd rather be in the aggressive team full of Gargoyles eager to steamroll than in the passive team full of laser-vomit MAD-IICs who wait behind their 'cover' to get surrounded.

Weight classes are quite meaningless in QP, it's rather how good the player utilize their mech's strengths and mitigate their weaknesses, how well they communicate and how they react on each other's and the opponent's actions.

TWIAFU, on 20 December 2017 - 05:50 AM, said:

They must change it immediately so that you can ONLY play someone in your tier or one higher, never lower.

"Never lower" implies "never higher" too.
If i can play against someone who is in a higher tier, this guy has to play against me as a lower tier.
So it's either no tier range at all or x tiers in both directions.

Edited by Daggett, 20 December 2017 - 08:15 AM.

[Foxfire kadrpg]

It's always been my thought : the longer it takes to kill a player, the more time he has to correct the mistake of positioning.

In my opinion, if everything could be one-shot, you'd be helping the elites immensely. The 'elite' players are ones who move to cover, and observe areas they know the enemy could come from. They are more likely to put themselves behind an unsuspecting enemy. If time to kill was short, the elite players could win by moving correctly. Since it takes a ridiculous amount of time to kill something, a person wandering into a dead zone can turn around when shot in the back, and then it becomes a simple game of trading blows, which is won in the mechbay, not combat.

[TWIAFU]

Daggett, on 20 December 2017 - 07:16 AM, said:

"Never lower" implies "never higher" too.
If i can play against someone who is in a higher tier, this guy has to play against me as a lower tier.
So it's either no tier range at all or x tiers in both directions.

Hahaha.

Good catch! I was thinking forward and not looking back.

Ok, can only play people of same Tier.



Screw wait times, pilots will only get beat by those of same tier.

Preferably, get rid of tiers. Make a kiddie pool for new players. Put them all in there and they stay until X matches done and then tossed out to play with everyone else.

[Jay Leon Hart]

Dawn Treader, on 20 December 2017 - 03:24 AM, said:

battletech has never been a quick TTK universe, go back to your twitch shooters this is a different beast entirely

MechWarrior has been, though. It's also a twitch shooter, in some situations. So yeah...

TWIAFU, on 20 December 2017 - 05:50 AM, said:

They must change it immediately so that you can ONLY play someone in your tier or one higher, never lower.

So you will never play anyone outside your tier, because to play someone in a higher tier, *they* have to play someone in a lower tier.

Edited by Jay Leon Hart, 20 December 2017 - 10:32 AM.

[Anjian]

Foxfire kadrpg, on 20 December 2017 - 07:34 AM, said:

It's always been my thought : the longer it takes to kill a player, the more time he has to correct the mistake of positioning.

In my opinion, if everything could be one-shot, you'd be helping the elites immensely. The 'elite' players are ones who move to cover, and observe areas they know the enemy could come from. They are more likely to put themselves behind an unsuspecting enemy. If time to kill was short, the elite players could win by moving correctly. Since it takes a ridiculous amount of time to kill something, a person wandering into a dead zone can turn around when shot in the back, and then it becomes a simple game of trading blows, which is won in the mechbay, not combat.

Not really. The expert player is only forced to consistently and repeatedly exercise his skill more. In a game of trading blows, the expert player will land more blows. A consistent and repeated exercise of skill and result provides a much more convincing exhibition and proof of the player's skill.

Sports, and esports is truly about the repeated exercise of skill. That's why boxing matches last 10 rounds, not one round. Why do you have six to nine innings for a baseball game instead of one. A baseball game has four quarters instead of one, and a championship series requires you to win 3 out of 5 games.

Repetition of skill is to assure that a shot or a strike is not fluke or luck or circumstance, and that performance is a consistent and sustained measure.

Edited by Anjian, 20 December 2017 - 10:50 AM.

[YueFei]

Anjian, on 20 December 2017 - 10:48 AM, said:

Not really. The expert player is only forced to consistently and repeatedly exercise his skill more. In a game of trading blows, the expert player will land more blows. A consistent and repeated exercise of skill and result provides a much more convincing exhibition and proof of the player's skill.

Sports, and esports is truly about the repeated exercise of skill. That's why boxing matches last 10 rounds, not one round. Why do you have six to nine innings for a baseball game instead of one. A baseball game has four quarters instead of one, and a championship series requires you to win 3 out of 5 games.

Repetition of skill is to assure that a shot or a strike is not fluke or luck or circumstance, and that performance is a consistent and sustained measure.

Agreed, that's why Tennis matches go for many rallies, not just a single rally.

A player who dominates another in Tennis, winning with scores like 6-1, 6-0, 6-1... typically wins about 60% of the rallies.

If you reduced the match to a single rally, and made it a coin-flip as to who served, the vastly inferior player would have a 40% win rate against the superior player.

[Xavori]

Khobai, on 11 December 2017 - 07:34 PM, said:

the problem isnt that good players are beating new players.

the problem is that good players are playing new players in the first place. why is that still a thing?

good players should play other good players

new players should play other new players until theyre good players

fix your matchmaker PGI, if there even is one...

We really, really need a good ranking system before the matchmaker can do anything though. The current PSR is garbage and has little to do with actual pilot skill.

[Khobai]

Quote

We really, really need a good ranking system before the matchmaker can do anything though. The current PSR is garbage and has little to do with actual pilot skill.

Im still not convinced that player skill is the problem. Because it seems to me if you take 24 random people and split them between two teams, that over thousands of games, the skill level will average out to be roughly equal.

I still believe that most of the imbalance comes from the mechs on both teams being unequal. In other words the game is won in the mech lab.

Because the mechs people choose doesnt follow any kindve predictable bellcurve. its almost entirely random with slight preferences for the flavor of the month mechs. And all it takes is one really bad assault mech to guarantee a team loses. Thats where the highest disparity occurs.. when your team rolls the dice to see if it gets a goofy LRM atlas or a quad AC/LBX annihilator.

Since PGI is dividing all the mechs in Solaris into 7 tiers anyway... they should just apply that concept to quickplay as well. Balance the mechs on each team based on the tiers theyre in.

I mean it wont help balance a complete troll build vs a good build. But it will help balance an atlas vs an annihilator, assuming both are running the best builds they can.

Edited by Khobai, 20 December 2017 - 11:47 AM.

[mogs01gt]

UnofficialOperator, on 11 December 2017 - 07:23 PM, said:

As argued by the majority of the community, increasing TTK will increase the gap between good players and new players because aiming and consistency is too much of an advantage for good players.

We need to immediately and drastically decrease TTK so that the gap is lesser and hence improving the new player experience and retention.

1. Decrease TTK
2. New player wins more
3. Higher retention numbers
4. Increase PGI income
5.

I'm sure the good players will agree to decrease TTK since the good players already have an advantage.

wait what? Decreasing TTK will make this CoD, why would I want to play CoD?

[Brain Cancer]

Quote

They must change it immediately so that you can ONLY play someone in your tier or one higher, never lower.

Wait times be damned.

This will change nothing, as frankly due to the PSR system, unskilled (and they never will gitgud) players have been pushed into every tier on their way to T1, where they stagnate.

Until it takes more effort to advance, maintain, and avoid Tier loss as you go up in Tier, there is not even a hint of separation by skill, only an exp bar.