356 replies to this topic

[Bassault]

Der Geisterbaer, on 12 January 2024 - 12:26 PM, said:

Interesting ... so if "low skilled" players were to show up in your game due to playing "low skill" but "effective" LRM you'd still expect to be able to "farm" them?

Of course I would.

Der Geisterbaer, on 12 January 2024 - 12:26 PM, said:

And who else is there?

Players who aren't that good at the game.

Der Geisterbaer, on 12 January 2024 - 12:26 PM, said:

So you think tier 1 is about a third in witdh of the entire percentile spectrum. Very interesting.

Probably a bit less.

Der Geisterbaer, on 12 January 2024 - 12:26 PM, said:

So which metric actually represents "player skill"?

It's a mix of kills per game, average wlr when playing alone, and matchscore.

Der Geisterbaer, on 12 January 2024 - 12:26 PM, said:

So you still insist that a player must be "able" (=distinctively above average in terms of gameplay skill / achievements) in order to be able to make judgment on balance (which should typically be done based on metrics and not individual feelings)

Sometimes it has to be done with feelings because determining if a ppc's velocity is too low or too high to be accurate with cannot be simply done with numbers.

Der Geisterbaer, on 12 January 2024 - 12:26 PM, said:

And your personal feeling concerning velocity is "better" (and thus better "balanced") because you have better aim and as such have zero insight on how it feels for someone of mere "average" skill (who actually make up about 66% within whatever normal distribution your looking at) ?!

Yeah they need to get better. If a ppc has enough velocity for the average player, for the good player it would be insanely overpowered, they would crush lobbies. The average player needs to get better or accept mediocrity.

Der Geisterbaer, on 12 January 2024 - 12:26 PM, said:

And another reminder: about 83% of any typical population will never be able to reach the levels that you demand before considering their opinions. They can "try to learn" from guys like you as much as they want the result will still be the same: They suck at the game itself despite having exposed to your "wisdom" about the actual mechanics and balance.

I don't believe this at all, it's a lot less than 83%. A lot of people are held back by knowledge and builds, and some people need more practice than others. Some people don't know how good you actually can get, and remain mediocre forever, making excuses to themselves when they get glimpses of the top 1% players doing things.

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 12:51 PM, said:

You say that like its some kind of "gotcha" moment.

I'm gonna share with you folks a concept from the comp community:

"A 99% Jarls may not tell me if you're are a good pilot or not, but there are *no* good pilots with a low Jarls."

Sincerely,

- The voice of the sobbing muhjarls death-horn

This is exacty it

[Shineplasma]

"Muhjarls" is a big meme for a reason.

Its a great tool, but a subjective measuring stick, which people often mis-use or don't fully understand.

The percentiles can be used to evaluate pilot skill in some ways, and give context to what people are saying, but it should always be taken with a grain of salt.

Even for those with "good" percentile ratings, there are ways to game the system.

Edited by Shineplasma, 12 January 2024 - 01:08 PM.

[Der Geisterbaer]

Luminios, on 12 January 2024 - 12:42 PM, said:

Even the cauldron occasionally misses the mark, but I trust their experience and their process to improve upon the game step by step while allowing new content to be added.

Personally I have little reason not to trust them overall in the same way you do. However, I'm regularly annoyed by

• lack of decent communication of the reasons behind certain developments here in the forums. (Yes I know, I could join the Discord server, but my personal experience with various Discords of that kind simply doesn't make that worthwhile).
  
• the dismissive nature of comments from supporters of the Cauldron (and in some cases even Cauldron members as well) that turn actual discussion threads into the exact type of poisoned "brown sea" that the very same people both try to distance themselves from as well as making jokes about (the necessary cognitive dissonance there seems mind boggling to me). And no, "eye for an eye" as justifictaion for simply "returning the favour" of some of the Cauldron "sceptic" to me just doesn't fly ... the motto should be "be better or don't even engage beyond making info available"

*****************************************************************************************

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 12:43 PM, said:

Which is hilarious, because snipers actually dunk on LRM boats in most instances purely due to the fact that they can deal concentrated damage by playing outside the max range of missiles.

I can stand 1100-1400m out and core lrm boats out without ever being threatened by a missile.

Which could raise the question if that situation is even supposed to be that way in terms of balance. But that's another discussion that probably wouldn't end well, or would it?!

[Der Geisterbaer]

Bassault, on 12 January 2024 - 12:52 PM, said:

I don't believe this at all, it's a lot less than 83%. A lot of people are held back by knowledge and builds, and some people need more practice than others. Some people don't know how good you actually can get, and remain mediocre forever, making excuses to themselves when they get glimpses of the top 1% players doing things.

That only raises the question for me how well you understand normal distributions.

[Shineplasma]

Der Geisterbaer, on 12 January 2024 - 01:10 PM, said:

Which could raise the question if that situation is even supposed to be that way in terms of balance. But that's another discussion that probably wouldn't end well, or would it?!

Its another discussion which has been had this thread and explained already, you just seem to be ignoring that.

Why should an easier to use weapon which aims for you be able to win in a 1v1 fight against a much higher skillcap weapon?

That sounds like bad game design which doesn't reward mastery or investment.

Systems which are easier to use/learn generally shouldn't outperform weapons/systems which are more difficult to master in any game, especially any PVP game.

Since this game is a shooter, I'd expect people to understand that weapons which require you to expose yourself to enemy fire and actually aim at/hit them using your own mechanical skill should generally be more effective than those that do not.

People who don't understand these concepts are not informed enough to make debating game balance with them any further worthwhile. Especially when they won't even take the cursory step of actually reaching out to the community which has these discussions in-depth, vets proposals, discusses them at length and actually votes on whether or not they would be good for the wider playerbase.

All you do is argue in circles. I'm sure you'll forget everything that's been stated here about jarls, tiers, match score and all the rest in time for next month's thread.

What a waste of my time.

Good luck folks, I'm outta here lol.

Edited by Shineplasma, 12 January 2024 - 01:28 PM.

[Bassault]

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 12:43 PM, said:

---

Interesting ... so if "low skilled" players were to show up in your game due to playing "low skill" but "effective" LRM you'd still expect to be able to "farm" them?

---

Contrary to some of the ridiculous statements in this thread, high tier players would have the easiest time adjusting to LRMs being strong/meta. Many would simply switch to playing true snipers or poptart mechs which can abuse cover effectively.

Some folks earlier said that the cauldron/all us toxic compies have been "keeping LRMs down because they counter their pet sniper meta".

Which is hilarious, because snipers actually dunk on LRM boats in most instances purely due to the fact that they can deal concentrated damage by playing outside the max range of missiles.

I can stand 1100-1400m out and core lrm boats out without ever being threatened by a missile.

Light mechs and poptarts are the true counters to sniper mechs, but most low tier players lack the game sense or mechanics to properly utilize them.

Also more of an incentive to have high alpha builds. Why would I ever want to be away from cover? Why not just blow my load and take cover since if LRMs got buffed I'd need cover EVEN more.

[Besh]

Der Geisterbaer, on 12 January 2024 - 01:14 PM, said:

That only raises the question for me how well you understand normal distributions.

"A picture says more than a thousand words" ?

But wait, I remember...there was a picture somewhere in this Thread .

Edited by Besh, 12 January 2024 - 01:22 PM.

[Der Geisterbaer]

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 01:18 PM, said:

Its another discussion which has been had this thread and explained already, you just seem to be ignoring that.

I haven't ignored it at all. Again the devil is in the details

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 01:18 PM, said:

Why should an easier to use weapon which aims for you be able to win in a 1v1 fight against a much higher skillcap weapon?

Who talked about "winning" there? The major point you tried to make is that snipers have the range advantage over LRM and thus would even win over LRM user if LRM were stronger. My question howver nowhere inferred that LRM need necessarily to be made stronger but rather pointed out that even an attempt of merely raising the question whether or not the range advantage should exist in the first place would directly lead into another mine field ... and given how you end your comment my prediction was spot on.

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 01:18 PM, said:

That sounds like bad game design which doesn't reward mastery or investment.

Which game design are we talking there? The one you strawmaned my question into or the actual question that I implicitly raised? Because

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 01:18 PM, said:

Systems which are easier to use/learn generally shouldn't outperform weapons/systems which are more difficult to master in any game, especially any PVP game.

I nowhere suggested a system )of LRM) that outperforms other more "difficult" weapons (like Gauss, [quirked] PPCs or [quirked] large lasers.)

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 01:18 PM, said:

All you do is argue in circles.

Am I really?

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 01:18 PM, said:

I'm sure you'll forget everything that's been stated about jarls, tiers, match score and all the rest in time for next month's thread.

A perfect example of what I was talking about ~laugh~

Shineplasma, on 12 January 2024 - 01:18 PM, said:

What a waste of my time.

I'll leave you then with a "Glad to be of service"