69 replies to this topic

[minist3r]

Now that PSR is so heavily based on match score across both teams the way match score is calculated needs to be fixed. It makes no sense that someone running lrms can spread 400 damage across an assault mech and get more match score than a person that focuses the target and gets a ct kill with 150 damage. Objectives also need to be weighted higher so that game modes like conquest don't devolve into a skirmish over theta every time. Reward light mechs for capping points and helping the team win instead of punishing them for having low damage numbers.

[martian]

minist3r, on 21 July 2020 - 09:59 PM, said:

Now that PSR is so heavily based on match score across both teams the way match score is calculated needs to be fixed. It makes no sense that someone running lrms can spread 400 damage across an assault mech and get more match score than a person that focuses the target and gets a ct kill with 150 damage. Objectives also need to be weighted higher so that game modes like conquest don't devolve into a skirmish over theta every time. Reward light mechs for capping points and helping the team win instead of punishing them for having low damage numbers.

People have been saying this for years.

PGI does not care.

[Nesutizale]

Please add Incursion objectives to the list that need some more points.
Yesterday I had a match where both teams where just standing at the most extreme ranges looking at each other and doing the nascar with no side realy hitting the other.
2 others and me decided that this is boring so we went into their base. Took out a Spider on the way and smashed the base.

Result?
77 matchscore....seriously we where the reason we won the match.
Easiest way I could think if is make damage done to the base be counted to your damage done.
The game registered only 20 damage done for me. Damn 5ERM and 4SRM4 should do a lot more in just one salve then that and I took out 3 buildings.

In that regard...yes I also think that Matchscore needs a little tweaking. Damage on the other hand. Even if someone just LRMs and doing the sandpapering...it still helps the team by makeing targets easier to kiill.
What I would see as a more importend point is that we need the LRMs to share armor...what is kinda beside why you take LRMs...you don't want to be at the frontline.
Sure with the change to the arc its better playable but still you will be not the first in line.

Edited by Nesutizale, 22 July 2020 - 12:19 AM.

[Kroete]

minist3r, on 21 July 2020 - 09:59 PM, said:

Now that PSR is so heavily based on match score across both teams the way match score is calculated needs to be fixed.

In the moment the matchmaker and the matchscores are not bad, for a solo game, catering for indiviaduals or small groups that go for the highest matchscore but dont have much weight on groupplay and wins.

Playing objectives is too low,
assisting (narc) is much to low and no, mostly no narc-kill because lrms do mostly kmdd not kills,
formations are to low if you want more teamplay,
Damage is rated to high, you can farm ms with it without doing much,
kills is to high, its just random if 4 people fire on the same enemy or makes people hold fire to "secure the kill",
kmdd is to low, its that groupplay equivalent of kill for soloplay,
assists to low for groupplay,
lock, lockdamage, counterecm, killing uav to low for groupplay.
Win to low with a matchscore based matchmaker.

Edited by Kroete, 22 July 2020 - 01:17 AM.

[OneTeamPlayer]

Let me save you some time.

Matchscore fine, rotate faster

Have you tried shooting them harder

Objectives are for dummies press W and hold M1 for true top level play

Have you tried turning left faster

My matchscore is high therefore matchscore is good

Did you notice a problem? You are the problem now as you'll respond, PGI never will, and I'm a coward.

I play once a week and everything seems fine to me!

Have you tried copy pasting mechs then repeating the same match thousands of times? That's how you get the most out of the game MatchscoreWarrior online where the point is the highest matchscore because i have the highest matchscore.

Did someone say kills? Cause kills kills kills kills, did i tell you i'm good at getting kills- no not kmdd or solo kills whats those?

I'd like to thank PGI for leaving the lights on and not murdering my dog. They are the best.

[Horseman]

minist3r, on 21 July 2020 - 09:59 PM, said:

Now that PSR is so heavily based on match score across both teams the way match score is calculated needs to be fixed. It makes no sense that someone running lrms can spread 400 damage across an assault mech and get more match score than a person that focuses the target and gets a ct kill with 150 damage. Objectives also need to be weighted higher so that game modes like conquest don't devolve into a skirmish over theta every time. Reward light mechs for capping points and helping the team win instead of punishing them for having low damage numbers.

Or I guess there should be a match score bonus based on the opponent's remaining health/components when you land a killshot.
But I wouldn't put much faith in PGI's ability to implement that.

[Ignatius Audene]

Come on guys. It is a free 2 play. Most games don't bother with mm or any point of stats other than dmg and or kills.

If u start this u can end up needing monster code to resolve, how much a hit is worth. Beam in 2 location good, 2 ok,3 meh? Take side torso or ct more points than arm? Weapon torso /arm more than no/ only small weapon?.......

[JagdpantherII]

I had a game where, while playing my Spider5V, solo capped the enemy base and won the game. I did the whole cap, and still lost PSR. Objetives should have more weigth, it may deter nascar.

Alas, my hopes for a deep change are low, dying game.

[OneTeamPlayer]

Ignatius Audene, on 22 July 2020 - 06:05 AM, said:

Come on guys. It is a free 2 play. Most games don't bother with mm or any point of stats other than dmg and or kills.

If u start this u can end up needing monster code to resolve, how much a hit is worth. Beam in 2 location good, 2 ok,3 meh? Take side torso or ct more points than arm? Weapon torso /arm more than no/ only small weapon?.......

Free to play means quite a few people (but small percentage wise) pay so that everyone else can get a free ride. Which is fine until the paying portion gets squeezed so hard they're dry too.

Early free to play systems are often predatorially designed to prey on certain....quirks which is why whales purchase a ton while most people purchase nothing or one mechpack.

Rather than improving the gameplay to retain customers some F2P companies choose to make greater and greater hurdles to progress to force players to continue investment- such changes like a completely reworked progression system that involves more in-game currency at a slower rate or more powerful items only available to paying customers which have a distinct and inarguable advantage over older items (including the paid older items).

At the end of the day MWO is a paid product to those who pay and just because other receive the product for free doesn't release PGI from the responsibility of creating a tuned, quality project.

It's not like "hey, they're an new indie developer" here.

Edited by OneTeamPlayer, 22 July 2020 - 06:17 AM.

[Snowhawk]

Ok, I think it's a good idea to give Players better rewards for playing the objectives.

But why punish lrm-players which are using a weapon system that can be easily countered? You can counter lrms with ecm, ams, cover and Radar deprivation… Lrm's are strong and weak at the same time.

[OneTeamPlayer]

Snowhawk, on 22 July 2020 - 08:16 AM, said:

Ok, I think it's a good idea to give Players better rewards for playing the objectives.

But why punish lrm-players which are using a weapon system that can be easily countered? You can counter lrms with ecm, ams, cover and Radar deprivation… Lrm's are strong and weak at the same time.

I would submit that anything under LRM 40 is near completely ineffective at this stage in MWOs life, yet players still talk about them as though they are the scourge of the battlefield.

LRMs are more effective at padding enemy scores than one's own.

[Brauer]

Snowhawk, on 22 July 2020 - 08:16 AM, said:

Ok, I think it's a good idea to give Players better rewards for playing the objectives.

But why punish lrm-players which are using a weapon system that can be easily countered? You can counter lrms with ecm, ams, cover and Radar deprivation… Lrm's are strong and weak at the same time.

The easy solution is to only increase PSR for a win and completely divorce it from match score. That'll still give most objective players low grades as "playing the objective" is not the most effective way to drive wins though.

[OneTeamPlayer]

Brauer, on 22 July 2020 - 09:30 AM, said:

The easy solution is to only increase PSR for a win and completely divorce it from match score. That'll still give most objective players low grades as "playing the objective" is not the most effective way to drive wins though.

Fun fact: Assault bases used to take slightly less time to cap.

Instead of players adjusting to defend their bases or having fast movers ready to respond, players just pushed for a change to assault so no instead of a base defense mode we have "skirmish, but you don't have to chase down the last guy" mode.

Lack of long term vision + community need to cut out all that isn't shooting strikes again.

Perfect Form Neon MWO will be a rail shooter with mechs where teams pass each other in a line and attempt to out quickdraw each other.

Edited by OneTeamPlayer, 22 July 2020 - 09:34 AM.

[Brauer]

OneTeamPlayer, on 22 July 2020 - 09:34 AM, said:

Fun fact: Assault bases used to take slightly less time to cap.

Instead of players adjusting to defend their bases or having fast movers ready to respond, players just pushed for a change to assault so no instead of a base defense mode we have "skirmish, but you don't have to chase down the last guy" mode.

Lack of long term vision + community need to cut out all that isn't shooting strikes again.

Perfect Form Neon MWO will be a rail shooter with mechs where teams pass each other in a line and attempt to out quickdraw each other.

From what I was able to gather it took about 2 minutes for a single mech to cap the point when the game was 8v8 and used far smaller maps, and that time was increased to about 4 minutes for a single mech after larger maps and 12v12 showed that this was a bit too cheesy. I don't see the appeal of having a super fast cap speed unless you really want every match to turn into what assault mode on Frozen City already is, two teams taking pot-shots at each other from range for ages. I don't really mind the occasional long-range trade match, but with how fast Spider 5Vs with the cap speed quirk can already cap the point I don't see any reason to change it.

But do keep complaining about people wanting gameplay in an FPS to center around engaging the enemy.

[OneTeamPlayer]

Brauer, on 22 July 2020 - 09:57 AM, said:

From what I was able to gather it took about 2 minutes for a single mech to cap the point when the game was 8v8 and used far smaller maps, and that time was increased to about 4 minutes for a single mech after larger maps and 12v12 showed that this was a bit too cheesy. I don't see the appeal of having a super fast cap speed unless you really want every match to turn into what assault mode on Frozen City already is, two teams taking pot-shots at each other from range for ages. I don't really mind the occasional long-range trade match, but with how fast Spider 5Vs with the cap speed quirk can already cap the point I don't see any reason to change it.

But do keep complaining about people wanting gameplay in an FPS to center around engaging the enemy.

Most games that want to feature nothing but facehumping the enemy are smart enough to make players move at a much swifter pace, which is probably why they have thriving communities instead of a cratering playerbase.

[My Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ]

No. You and every other [redacted] wanting to feel validated for wasting time capping deserve to get peanuts for it.

Damaging and killing mechs is still the most important thing you can do, even in conquest.

Edited by Ekson Valdez, 23 July 2020 - 10:38 PM.

[Nesutizale]

And you want to feel validated for damageing and killing mechs. Funny both sides want the same, beeing validated but with different gameplay elements.

[denAirwalkerrr]

Nesutizale, on 23 July 2020 - 12:08 AM, said:

And you want to feel validated for damageing and killing mechs. Funny both sides want the same, beeing validated but with different gameplay elements.

Nascar jokes aside one requires just pressing WASD and running around map while other requires cranial capacity bigger then of hamster because you need to aim and click buttons as well as position yourself based on current situation. Geewiz I wonder why the game is called “Mechwarrior” rather then “Run around the map and stand on place until bar fills up”.

[BTGbullseye]

Hawker Siddeley, on 22 July 2020 - 03:37 PM, said:

Damaging and killing mechs is still the most important thing you can do, even in conquest.

And that is in fact the problem, because if you can win with a couple lights while there are several enemies left, you should be rewarded for your piloting skill.

[denAirwalkerrr]

BTGbullseye, on 23 July 2020 - 01:05 AM, said:

And that is in fact the problem, because if you can win with a couple lights while there are several enemies left, you should be rewarded for your piloting running around the map skill.

Fixed it for ya. Also if you're interested in that kind of gameplay I heard Death Stranding just released on PC.

Edited by denAirwalkerrr, 23 July 2020 - 01:39 AM.