62 replies to this topic

[Weeny Machine]

Dedra Meero, on 18 March 2023 - 10:40 AM, said:

I'll just come right out and say it.

The light mech meta in this game currently has turned it into run'n'gun Call of Duty wearing robot versions of furry suits.

• Light mechs have multiple weapon slots with some carrying more total damage output than mediums.
  
• Light mechs have high top speeds with combined with hitreg for the game and netcode makes a lot of, what appears to be hits, actually miss and do no damage.
  
• This on top of light mechs already having small profile and avoid hits as it is.
  
• Then, to make things even better, several of them also have stealth armor.

I've always been a fan of light mechs as scouts, as skirmisher and harassers. But that is not the case anymore. Having a light mech pack doing run'n'gun like some drunken CoD event is the name of the game and more often than not will push a team to victory.



So is this supposed to be a game with battlemechs or a weird call of duty furry game in robot suits?

You tell me.

Multiple mechs destroying one mech when they focus fire it...that's a thing only lights can do for sure!!! The same goes for stealth armour.
Boah, this class can do things no other class can do! Nerf 11!!!!111!!

Edited by Weeny Machine, 19 March 2023 - 11:37 AM.

[Duke Falcon]

Lights are OP! Nerf them!

Now they are sux! Buff them!

LRMs OP! Nerf them!

Good players with sense are OP! Nerf\ban them!

Real life is OP! Nerf it!

Whatever is OP! ...

Waaaaait! Are we trolling a troll thread?!

BUNK!

[pbiggz]

hello friends

[Widowmaker1981]

Lights are not OP, but i do hate matches with lots of them. Its just not the game i want to play, i dont really find circle strafing ankle biters to be very... battletech feeling.

So, selfishly, i do want them to be nerfed (especially the walking insult that is the Urbanmech) because id be happier with fewer of them in games.

Edited by Widowmaker1981, 20 March 2023 - 08:50 AM.

[MechWarrior2407734]

Backstabbing lights are very much a battletech thing. Also urbies are slow and easy to hit. Just shoot off the arms and 90% of the time you end up with a weaponless stick.

[Curccu]

Grand Moff Token, on 20 March 2023 - 09:00 AM, said:

Backstabbing lights are very much a battletech thing. Also urbies are slow and easy to hit. Just shoot off the arms and 90% of the time you end up with a weaponless stick.

I wouldn't call 104,5 slow and urbies has one of the best hitboxes and high very good weapon mounts... But play with your main account instead of that T4 alt and light pilots might get but more elusive. If you are not an alt then welcome to T1 in the future.

Edited by Curccu, 20 March 2023 - 09:50 AM.

[MechWarrior2407734]

Curccu, on 20 March 2023 - 09:50 AM, said:

I wouldn't call 104,5 slow and urbies has one of the best hitboxes and high very good weapon mounts... But play with your main account instead of that T4 alt and light pilots might get but more elusive. If you are not an alt then welcome to T1 in the future.

Its slow enough to still easily hit. Plus the good hitboxes only matter if you are twisting and twisting an urbie just happens to expose the bits you want to shoot off. As to t4 I'm just a sliver away from t2 and t1 should be in the next week or so of playing only a fle-20. So see you soon!

[Tarteso]

Der Geisterbaer, on 19 March 2023 - 06:02 AM, said:

When in doubt in the very source that you are trying to refer to.
Just look at the foot notes for the global stats where you'll find this explaination on how Jarl's achieves numbers that allows to compare players against each other:

Ranks are determined by adjusted match score for players who have been active in the last three months.
Players who have stopped playing are still tracked but are placed into "retirement". They will be placed back into ranks if they return but their latest performance will have significant effect on their placement when returning.
How Adjusted Score Formula is calculated: ((Season Average Match Score)*((Season#+1)^1.8))*(-(1.007^(-TotalGamesPlayed)-1))*(ClassMultiplier)
This will give full score around 500 games and each new season is weighed higher than the last. After this, the score is adjusted based on classes played.
The weight class coefficients are derived from each classes' recent global performance. The current class weights are:
Light: 1.111111111, Medium: 0.9803921569, Heavy: 1, Assault: 0.9523809524.

I guess you'll be able to figure out what those "weight class coefficients" mean in terms of how the actual numbers numbers look when comparing weight classes among each other. Hint: Light numbers have to be inflated by 11% vs. heavies about 16% against assaults and about 12% against mediums in order to make those number comparable. The only minor change against older data of the same type is that currently mediums also seem to have a "negative" coefficient against heavies (but still close enough to not matter that much when compared against assault and light coefficients).

I´m interpreting those numbers as unadjusted % of use. I don´t know for what are these weight class coefficients being used for and can´t guess why mech usage should be adjusted, at all. If anyone can confirm that absolute % usage are being adjusted that way, I´ll redo my analysis. But I don´t think it could make any difference, given the huge deviations in every ton class.

The funny thing is that, if these coefficients are related to the "recent global performance", here you have the proof, apparently, that lights are (moderatelly) overperforming. And thus, I think that you are wrong in the meaning of these coefficients (your last paragraph).

Der Geisterbaer, on 19 March 2023 - 06:02 AM, said:

A "quick" and still heavily biased "analysis". Do yourself the favour and do that comparison against the entire "active" player base.

No, I'm not surprised to see that someone is citing a particular source which they clearly never even bothered to take a closer look at and then proceed to provide further numbers that are rife of selection bias.

Provide a handy table with such data. Heck, if you have such thing, perform stat analysis yourself and share your meaningful and unbiased results with everybody. I´m not going to hesitate about your results, I promise.

Der Geisterbaer, on 19 March 2023 - 06:02 AM, said:

That's quite obviously not the only thing that you "don't know".

Then please, enlighten me with your exact knowledge about the real mech class performance/usage, based on real data, and settle the question once and for all. I´ll be very grateful.

Edited by Tarteso, 20 March 2023 - 02:04 PM.

[Magnus Santini]

In one category, lights have always outshone every other class in MWO. And that is roleplaying. Even considering comms only, most players are limited to one of three roles: (1) grizzled vet who has only a couple weeks to go and should be at the spaceport right now; (2) paramedic who found the actual pilot slumped over the controls just before drop; and (3) Lieutenant Future "T.K." Victim, asking if the team is there yet. Lights can usually get in at least a couple of (1) heroic discoverer that "they're heading toward the palace;" (2) superhero who saves a life but can't be thanked because he has to fly off to stop a train wreck a couple klicks away; and (3) the cheese placed in between the hammer and anvil.

[Stone Wall]

Orion_, on 18 March 2023 - 11:14 AM, said:

My favorite part about the 'meta' light mechs is that no one plays them so they're a good fallback when games take forever to find. Lights are super annoying but they're hardly ruining the game.

I used to run them when I played. It was great messing up a line of LRMers.

[Der Geisterbaer]

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

I´m interpreting those numbers as unadjusted % of use.

The numbers you're seeing on Jarl's are "adjusted" to fit the intent of Jarl's: To make performance metrics between players and their "preferred" and most often used mech chassis comparable between players.

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

I don´t know for what are these weight class coefficients being used for

So you don't actually have understood what the statistics you tried to throw at me actually mean.

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

and can´t guess why mech usage should be adjusted, at all.

Again a slight reading comprehension problem then. The text that tells you about those coefficients also should tell you why it's done. Hint: mech usage is indeed not involved but I do seem to recall that "we" talked about more than just "mech usage", didn't "we"?

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

If anyone can confirm that absolute % usage are being adjusted that way, I´ll redo my analysis. But I don´t think it could make any difference, given the huge deviations in every ton class.

Oh, more misunderstanding there. The problem concerning % usage of mechs is an entirely separate problem with your methodology and has nothing to do with the coefficents (which deal with key performance indicators like average damage, average match score in order to make them comparable between classes and from there to the players themselves).

The problem as far as % usage is concerned was your heavy selection bias when doing a "quick analysis" based on the top 100 players. In order to get to proper results you'd have to compare about 380 to 650 randomly chosen players from the roughly 30000 recorded "active" players on Jarl's to have a decent enough chance of getting usage percentages that have confidence levels of 95 to 99% and within 5% margin of error.

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

The funny thing is that, if these coefficients are related to the "recent global performance", here you have the proof, apparently, that lights are (moderatelly) overperforming.

The "proof" is apparently that Lights require an 1.11 multiplier on their performance values to make their results actually comparable to that of an Heavy. If you have to inflate the actual number by multiplying it with a value that increases the original value in order to make something comparable against something else, there's little chance that the something that you are inflating actually has "overperformed".

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

And thus, I think that you are wrong in the meaning of these coefficients (your last paragraph).

Thus I'm very confident that you still have no clue what the statics you're trying to throw at me actually mean.

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

Provide a handy table with such data.

Fun fact: The Jarl's list is one such table of such data ... currently spread over about 998 pages.

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

Heck, if you have such thing, perform stat analysis yourself and share your meaningful and unbiased results with everybody.

You and me both have the same access to said data. Unlike you I didn't make a faulty "quick analysis" and nothing I wrote so far put me in a spot where I'd have to actually go and do this for you or anybody else
You on the other hand did put yourself in such a spot and now you're trying to pass the onus onto me but I'm not taking it.

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

I´m not going to hesitate about your results, I promise.

Nor would I hesitate yours if they reflected you actually understanding what you're talking about and indicated proper procedure.

The "funny thing" is: I specifically asked the OP (and since you tried to pick up the mantle you as well) to provide such numbers because I'm familiar with others having done such analysis (and even posting the results on this forum in older threads) and those prior results always put heavies and assaults at the top both in usage and key performance indicators like average damage and average match result while Lights firmly were the bottom-feeders.
So: Convince me that this has actually changed by properly doing the analysis of available data to show that what you claim to be true is actually true.

Tarteso, on 20 March 2023 - 02:02 PM, said:

Then please, enlighten me with your exact knowledge about the real mech class performance/usage, based on real data, and settle the question once and for all. I´ll be very grateful.

Not my (actual) claims,so still not my job

Edited by Der Geisterbaer, 21 March 2023 - 01:02 PM.

[foamyesque]

Der Geisterbaer, on 21 March 2023 - 06:34 AM, said:

The "funny thing" is: I specifically asked the OP (and since you tried to pick up the mantle you as well) to provide such numbers because I'm familiar with others having done such analysis (and even posting the results on this forum in older threads) and those prior results always put heavies and assaults at the top both in usage and key performance indicators like average damage and average match result while Lights firmly were the bottom-feeders.

I'd be interested to know -- though I don't know if that information is extractable from Jarl's -- what the *spread* is within a category. My impression (backed by nothing but my personal play experience, to be clear) is that light mechs tend to be machines that are easy to drive badly, hard to drive well, but when they *are* driven well are both immensely frustrating to fight *and* disproportionately effective. Might be interesting to see things like top 5% MS, bottom 5%, maybe quartiles, etc.

[Tarteso]

Der Geisterbaer, on 21 March 2023 - 06:34 AM, said:

"Blah blah blah, you are lost"

I´m aware of how statistics works, thank you, but not my job, either, to collect all that data manually. But given that you love to argue endlessly and know everything so well, just prove your claims and show a serious analysis (collect the data from the 998 pages yourself, thank you) to validate your belief that " Lights are the least played weight class with the lowest averages for damage / match score" to finish this discussion, if you are so confident

This question is not trivial, as long as that belief, and the flawed (IMO) argument, that poor lights should perform similarly to heavier mechs, has driven lots of direct and indirect buffs for the light class. And this is the very basis for the OP comentary (not the first time I have read something like this): "this game currently has turned it into run'n'gun Call of Duty wearing robot versions of furry suits", which I subscribe BTW

[feeWAIVER]

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

serious ****

In no universe to lights perform anywhere near like a heavy.
Shoot a piranha in the ct, then shoot a timber wolf in the ct.
The results are dramatically different.

[MechWarrior2407734]

This thread must be sparking some light lance play because I witnessed several light lances some driven by fairly high end players getting vaporized last night. Yeah they took out a mech or two but were quickly swarmed and eliminated when the ENTIRE team turned around to zap them. Light lances work when you are facing inexperienced unorganized lower tiers but once you cross over into tier 3 and higher then the odds of facing teams that don't panic and can aim greatly increase. If they performed ALL the time at all tiers you would see far more of them in general play.

[Curccu]

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

I´m aware of how statistics works, thank you, but not my job, either, to collect all that data manually. But given that you love to argue endlessly and know everything so well, just prove your claims and show a serious analysis (collect the data from the 998 pages yourself, thank you) to validate your belief that " Lights are the least played weight class with the lowest averages for damage / match score" to finish this discussion, if you are so confident

Heres link to old post of Der Geisterbaer that has some data rips from season 1 to 62 (Sep '21) personally I haven't felt any meaningful buffs to light mechs generally that would have changed this. https://mwomercs.com...ost__p__6439303

You could also ask Tarogato or others who have created Jarl's if they can be nice and create up to date charts of said data, with their database skills it probably takes few minutes...

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

This question is not trivial, as long as that belief, and the flawed (IMO) argument, that poor lights should perform similarly to heavier mechs, has driven lots of direct and indirect buffs for the light class. And this is the very basis for the OP comentary (not the first time I have read something like this): "this game currently has turned it into run'n'gun Call of Duty wearing robot versions of furry suits", which I subscribe BTW

Do you mean light mech just should be worst and they shouldn't be able to achieve similar match scores as other classes because in BT (turn based strategy game) they are weak?
I mean (in quickplay) we got 1 mech for 1 game, no matter which mech it is. We don't get 4.5 spiders for one dire wolf as we would in BT battlevalues

Edited by Curccu, 21 March 2023 - 01:22 PM.

[Der Geisterbaer]

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

I´m aware of how statistics works, thank you,

And it would appear that you don't understand it well enough to properly use it in your arguments. Instead you're now going with attempts of "insulting" rewrites in quote tags that include my user name

Thanks for "playing" but no price for you.

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

but not my job, either, to collect all that data manually.

You don't need to "correct" any data at all. All you have to do with regards to mech usage percentages is to provide an analysis that isn't as biased as your original one in order to show that your claim is actually true.

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

But given that you love to argue endlessly and know everything so well, just prove your claims

Which are my claims exactly? Because ...

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

and show a serious analysis (collect the data from the 998 pages yourself, thank you) to validate your belief that " Lights are the least played weight class with the lowest averages for damage / match score" to finish this discussion, if you are so confident

... I didn't make that "claim" nor do I hold an actual "belief" in that. I'm "confident" that I'm still under no obligation to do your work for you.

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

This question is not trivial,

Luckily I didn't make a claim to the contrary ... you're now getting into fallacy territory

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

as long as that belief,

No belief involved Again fallacy territory.

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

and the flawed (IMO) argument, that poor lights should perform similarly to heavier mechs,

Who said that Lights should perform "similar" to heavier mechs?
Oh and since we're at it and you now claimed that this type of argument in your opinion is "flawed" you'll now have to actually present your own arguments as to why this argument is flawed with regards to a 12 v 12 deathmatch FPS game environment.

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

has driven lots of direct and indirect buffs for the light class.

And an additional claim that you'll have to substantiate with arguments and proof.

Tarteso, on 21 March 2023 - 11:18 AM, said:

And this is the very basis for the OP comentary (not the first time I have read something like this): "this game currently has turned it into run'n'gun Call of Duty wearing robot versions of furry suits", which I subscribe BTW

And I explicitly asked him and you to actually prove your claim to be true ... which neither the OP nor you did so far.

Edited by Der Geisterbaer, 21 March 2023 - 01:19 PM.

[feeWAIVER]

please stop with the multi-quoting. It's super annoying.

Edited by feeWAIVER, 21 March 2023 - 03:14 PM.

[Maj Destruction]

I used to get kinda annoyed at lights beating up my assault brawlers and LRM boats. So I started playing lights myself. I do far less damage (and, truth be told, am probably contributing less to the team) but I have a lot more fun. Big slow mechs were easier for me to ease into as a n00b, but I enjoy the faster paced gameplay and sneakiness of the lights. Plus being in a fast stealthed Flea means I have a better chance of running away from bad situations of my own making...(I only play occasionally, and I'm not very good).

I've said it before, but if OP thinks lights are so unbalanced, why not play them? Get you some of the "unbalanced" action for yourself!

Matt

[Der Geisterbaer]

feeWAIVER, on 21 March 2023 - 02:31 PM, said:

please stop with the multi-quoting. It's super annoying.

You'll have to live with that. I won't change my posting style that serves a very particular purpose for me just because you (or anyone else) feel annoyed by having to scroll a bit longer than you like.