241 replies to this topic

[MegaBopper]

I am disgusted with the kind of what I see as clearly overt biasing that is taking place in this game based on what I see in game. It is my opinion that it is biased towards ballistic weapons and high tier players and against lower tier players and the weapons that they are more likely to use. I left the game before for a year when I reached a level of disgust and irritation with changes that in my opinion were clearly meant to have the same kind of effect that is happening here. I came back to see if there has been any improvement. It is clear to me now that low level players are being treated as nothing more than cannon fodder for upper tier players. Because of this I have never spent a single red cent on this game and going forward I never will. If these kinds of changes are not undone to return to a proper balance to provide equal effectiveness to all types of weapons for all tiers of players I will likely leave the game again this time permanently. This game is clearly approaching death throes. If it continues it is my opinion that a vast majority of low tier players will speak their mind as happened in the past by leaving the game. Enjoy finding a match when that happens.

The so called "balancing" that took place with respect to the match maker appears to me to have done nothing more than place all of the high tier players on one team and all the "cannon fodder" on the other team. Why do I say this? I know I am "the worst mechwarrior in the universe" and I am at the bottom of the bottom tier. But curiously when the match maker makes a "mistake" which appears to occur approximately less than 3% of the time and places me in a team with high level players my scores and ability to contribute to the team are extraordinarily better than when I am as usual on a team that is mostly if not all low end players. I get so tired of Tier 1 stomps. It makes the game very unappealing.

It is my opinion that the only thing that will save this game is to restore equality as noted above and install a handicap system (a way of equalizing their scores/effectiveness with higher level) similar to what is used in golf and other games to make it possible for low tier players to be able to have a reasonable chance of competing with upper tier players. As a player's level increases that handicap would be decreased based on increased average scores. If this is not done I foresee a massive loss in the player base as the game continues to become more and more of a "insert your own phrase that may not be used due to code of conduct restrictions here" until it finally ceases to exist for lack of players who have left because they are sick and tired of being treated as nothing more than cannon fodder and the toxic abuse that is rained upon them when they object to the current and foreseeable state of the game and the increasing nerfs that clearly are making it impossible for them to be able to effectively play and enjoy the game.

Edited by MegaBopper, 13 January 2024 - 04:15 PM.

[Bud Crue]

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:15 PM, said:

I am disgusted with the kind of what I see as clearly overt biasing that is taking place in this game based on what I see in game. It is my opinion that it is biased towards ballistic weapons and high tier players and against lower tier players and the weapons that they are more likely to use. I left the game before for a year when I reached a level of disgust and irritation with changes that in my opinion were clearly meant to have the same kind of effect that is happening here. I came back to see if there has been any improvement. It is clear to me now that low level players are being treated as nothing more than cannon fodder for upper tier players. Because of this I have never spent a single red cent on this game and going forward I never will. If these kinds of changes are not undone to return to a proper balance to provide equal effectiveness to all types of weapons for all tiers of players I will likely leave the game again this time permanently. This game is clearly approaching death throes. If it continues it is my opinion that a vast majority of low tier players will speak their mind as happened in the past by leaving the game. Enjoy finding a match when that happens.

The so called "balancing" that took place with respect to the match maker appears to me to have done nothing more than place all of the high tier players on one team and all the "cannon fodder" on the other team. Why do I say this? I know I am "the worst mechwarrior in the universe" and I am at the bottom of the bottom tier. But curiously when the match maker makes a mistake which appears to occur approximately less than 3% of the time and places me in a team with high level players my scores and ability to contribute to the team are extraordinarily better than when I am as usual on a team that is mostly if not all low end players. I get so tired of Tier 1 stomps. It makes the game very unappealing.

It is my opinion that the only thing that will save this game is to restore equality as noted above and install a handicap system (a way of equalizing their scores/effectiveness with higher level) similar to what is used in golf and other games to make it possible for low tier players to be able to have a reasonable chance of competing with upper tier players. As a player's level increases that handicap would be decreased based on increased average scores. If this is not done I foresee a massive loss in the player base as the game continues to become more and more of a "insert your own phrase that may not be used due to code of conduct restrictions here" until it finally ceases to exist for lack of players who have left because they are sick and tired of being treated as nothing more than cannon fodder and the toxic abuse that is rained upon them when they object to the current and foreseeable state of the game and the increasing nerfs that clearly are making it impossible for them to be able to effectively play and enjoy the game.

Hold on. So you claim that the system as it currently stands put all the T1 players on one side and everyone else on the other to such an extent that less than 3% of the time you get matched with T1 players, and when this objectively uncommon (rare) occurrence does occur, you do "extraordinarily better" then normal.

Your proposed solution to this admittedly rare occurrence is to introduce some sort of handicapping system so that bad players can be somehow equal to T1 players...even though only less than 3% of the time such players are put together according to you.

Do I have this right?

Edited by Bud Crue, 13 January 2024 - 02:31 PM.

[MegaBopper]

Bud Crue, on 13 January 2024 - 02:30 PM, said:

Hold on. So you claim that the system as it currently stands put all the T1 players on one side and everyone else on the other to such an extent that less than 3% of the time you get matched with T1 players, and when this objectively uncommon (rare) occurrence does occur, you do "extraordinarily better" then normal.

Your proposed solution to this admittedly rare occurrence is to introduce some sort of handicapping system so that bad players can be somehow equal to T1 players...even though only less than 3% of the time such players are put together according to you.

Do I have this right?

No you do not have it right.

I find your implication that there are T1 players and "bad" players to be highly offensive.

What I said was to give lower tier players a reasonable chance to compete with upper tier players. That is predicated on the basis that it is given that they are not equal. When that is pushed in their face with the way things currently appear to be set up it makes them not want to play because it is no longer any fun let alone spend any money on it. Further as their level of play improves as a result the effect of that handicap would be reduced proportionally as they approach T1 (if indeed that ever occurs).

Edited by MegaBopper, 13 January 2024 - 02:44 PM.

[Bud Crue]

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:38 PM, said:

No you do not have it right.

I find your implication that there are T1 players and "bad" players to be highly offensive.

What I said was to give lower tier players a reasonable chance to compete with upper tier players. That is predicated on the basis that it is given that they are not equal. When that is pushed in their face with the way things currently appear to be set up it makes them not want to play because it is no longer any fun let alone spend any money on it.

You are right, I should not have characterized non T1 players as "bad" (I consider myself pretty bad, and I am certainly not a T1 player). But still, the question remains: why introduce any system to allow lower tier players a reasonable chance to compete with upper tier players when the whole system is designed to keep them apart from one another? By your own narrative above, the system appear to be working as intended, with only a "less than 3% of the time" error rate. Pushing a handicapping system on to the game based on something that occurs so rarely just seems rather extreme.

[ScrapIron Prime]

kalashnikity said:

1705174412[/url]' post='6525877']
I'm not downloading discord spyware,

You don’t actually have to download Discord, you can use the web version on your browser. Your regular antivirus will cover that if you’re concerned about such things.

i don’t like having to get info there either, but that’s the system we have at current so that’s where I’ll go for info.

Edited by ScrapIron Prime, 13 January 2024 - 02:49 PM.

[Bassault]

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:15 PM, said:

It is my opinion that the only thing that will save this game is to restore equality as noted above and install a handicap system (a way of equalizing their scores/effectiveness with higher level) similar to what is used in golf and other games to make it possible for low tier players to be able to have a reasonable chance of competing with upper tier players. As a player's level increases that handicap would be decreased based on increased average scores. If this is not done I foresee a massive loss in the player base as the game continues to become more and more of a "insert your own phrase that may not be used due to code of conduct restrictions here" until it finally ceases to exist for lack of players who have left because they are sick and tired of being treated as nothing more than cannon fodder and the toxic abuse that is rained upon them when they object to the current and foreseeable state of the game and the increasing nerfs that clearly are making it impossible for them to be able to effectively play and enjoy the game.

If you did that, all the top players would quit. Then the next best players would fill in those top spots, and they will be infuriated that they're being artificially dragged down and they would quit too. Then it will continue to happen to the next best players until the game is pretty much ded. Nobody likes working hard and getting less and less of a reward for it.

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:38 PM, said:

I find your implication that there are T1 players and "bad" players to be highly offensive.

Too bad that's the way it is.

[MegaBopper]

Bud Crue, on 13 January 2024 - 02:48 PM, said:

You are right, I should not have characterized non T1 players as "bad" (I consider myself pretty bad, and I am certainly not a T1 player). But still, the question remains: why introduce any system to allow lower tier players a reasonable chance to compete with upper tier players when the whole system is designed to keep them apart from one another? By your own narrative above, the system appear to be working as intended, with only a "less than 3% of the time" error rate. Pushing a handicapping system on to the game based on something that occurs so rarely just seems rather extreme.

I would posit that the system is not "working" but is indeed inherently broken because history has shown that such actions as we are currently seeing serves only to destroy the players base. That can only result in the destruction of the game as a whole. This kind of game setup must change if as I am certain we all want the game to be enjoyable so that it will attract players instead of the opposite.

Right now almost everyone I have spoken to personally have very unkind things to say about MWO (most of their responses cannot be repeated here). What do you think is the reason for that?

Bassault, on 13 January 2024 - 02:53 PM, said:

If you did that, all the top players would quit. Then the next best players would fill in those top spots, and they will be infuriated that they're being artificially dragged down and they would quit too. Then it will continue to happen to the next best players until the game is pretty much ded. Nobody likes working hard and getting less and less of a reward for it.

Too bad that's the way it is.

In a handicap system such as I have proposed there would be no ill effect imposed on high tier players only a way of helping the lower tier players to develop consistently better performance with a resultant decreasing of the effect of the handicap as they do so. Experience in other gaming platforms has consistently shown that this is what actually happens.

So the T1 players would object to having more competition? How sad.

Edited by MegaBopper, 13 January 2024 - 03:17 PM.

[Ihlrath]

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:56 PM, said:

So the T1 players would object to having more competition? How sad.

Uh, yes. YEs they would. Which is why the game is in the state it is now. They don't want competition or "balance". They want the game favoring long range high alpha pin point damage. that's what they currently have. Nerfing LRMs again because a few have learned how to make them effective against that tactic is just par for the course.

MG lights - nerfed
Scaleshot - nerfed
LRMs - Nerfed, nerfed, and nerfed

Its just how it is my man. That's what happens when you ask your 'elite' player base to balance the game.

[Bud Crue]

Bassault, on 13 January 2024 - 02:53 PM, said:

If you did that, all the top players would quit. Then the next best players would fill in those top spots, and they will be infuriated that they're being artificially dragged down and they would quit too. Then it will continue to happen to the next best players until the game is pretty much ded. Nobody likes working hard and getting less and less of a reward for it.


Too bad that's the way it is.

Honestly, I don't think the system that he is proposing would make a bit of difference. Give all the bad players (and by bad I mean all of us, regardless of tier, who run stupid builds, make terrible positioning error, refuse to play the game as it is designed and insist on trying to play the game that we want it to be, etc.) some damage bonus or armor bonus or whatever, or alternatively hit the top level players with some sort of negative, and the top tier folks will still own the rest of us; it would just take a bit more time to settle back in to the status quo.

I'm merely curious as to why he thinks we need such a handicap system when by his own commentary, the system appears to be working more than 97% of the time.

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:56 PM, said:

I would posit that the system is not "working" but is indeed inherently broken because history has shown that such actions as we are currently seeing serves only to destroy the players base. That can only result in the destruction of the game as a whole. This kind of game setup must change if as I am certain we all want the game to be enjoyable so that it will attract players instead of the opposite.

What you described above ("...when the match maker makes a mistake which appears to occur approximately less than 3% of the time and places me in a team with high level players...") sure sounds like a system that is working more then 97% of the time. Yet we need a handicap system to enforce some sort of false equity for that "less than 3%" chance occurrence? That makes no sense to me.

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:56 PM, said:

Right now almost everyone I have spoken to personally have very unkind things to say about MWO (most of their responses cannot be repeated here). What do you think is the reason for that?

The main criticism I hear from non-mechwarrior fans about this game is that it is too slow, and it is played by mostly older men. Both are legit criticisms. But that has nothing to do with the issue at hand. You have not identified ANY problem with the game that your handicap system would address, let alone any of the unspeakable criticisms you hear from everybody. You gave an example of how incredibly rare it is for T1 players to be matched with lower tier players. Would the handicap system you are proposing make that less than 3% chance even smaller?

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:56 PM, said:

In a handicap system such as I have proposed there would be no ill effect imposed on high tier players only a way of helping the lower tier players to develop consistently better performance with a resultant decreasing of the effect of the handicap as they do so. Experience in other gaming platforms has consistently shown that this is what actually happens. So the T1 players would object to having more competition? How sad.

This game has been going for 13 years, its going to end some point and the lack of a handicapping system is not going to be why. Nor would instituting a handicap system change that end.

Edited by Bud Crue, 13 January 2024 - 03:20 PM.

[Bassault]

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:56 PM, said:

I would posit that the system is not "working" but is indeed inherently broken because history has shown that such actions as we are currently seeing serves only to destroy the players base. That can only result in the destruction of the game as a whole. This kind of game setup must change if as I am certain we all want the game to be enjoyable so that it will attract players instead of the opposite.

Right now almost everyone I have spoken to personally have very unkind things to say about MWO (most of their responses cannot be repeated here). What do you think is the reason for that?



In a handicap system such as I have proposed there would be no ill effect imposed on high tier players only a way of helping the lower tier players to develop consistently better performance with a resultant decreasing of the effect of the handicap as they do so. Experience in other gaming platforms has consistently shown that this is what actually happens.

So the T1 players would object to having more competition? How sad.

If the low tier players have a stat boost over the high tier players, it might as well be that the high skilled players are punished for being good because the result is the same, an unfair disadvantage. The only "unfair disadvantage" the enemy should have is a skill one, because that's what pvp games are about. Outskilling the enemy in a competition. What you are proposing will make players quit because you are punishing players for putting effort into learning how to play.

[kalashnikity]

Vxheous, on 13 January 2024 - 12:29 PM, said:

Hmm, indirect fire velocity is 160m/s, +15% from skill tree gives you 184m/s, before any LRM velocity quirks from specific mechs. If said missile were to have to travel 10 seconds, it would reach....1840m. Since LRM range is ~1000m with skill tree, max missile travel time is ~5 seconds.

But let's not let actual facts get in the way of your rants.

Go linear 1000m, how far is that in a giant parabola? I made a wild guesstimate. about 1.6x1000m, I'm sure I was off a few percent. maybe 1.5x maybe 1.8x IDK. I know It's a lot farther to follow the parabola. If I knew the exact starting angle I could calculate it. :::shrug::: If I had a couple friends to go in training grounds we could just time it. But I don't have any friend, cause I'm a jerk. I'm a jerk. I'm a jerk. I'm a jerk.

[Shineplasma]

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 02:56 PM, said:

So the T1 players would object to having more competition? How sad.

Ah yes, that must be why the comp community organizes multiple international tournaments per year containing up to hundreds of teams which span global timezones, seeds them into skill-ranked divisions, coordinates dates/times for teams as far apart as NA, EU and Oceania to play matches, tracks circuit points throughout the year to seed for worlds and spends hundreds of hours planning, strategizing and practicing maps and strats throughout the season.

Its all done to avoid competition. It makes sense now, thanks for clearing that up!

Edited by Shineplasma, 13 January 2024 - 03:31 PM.

[MegaBopper]

Bassault, on 13 January 2024 - 03:20 PM, said:

If the low tier players have a stat boost over the high tier players, it might as well be that the high skilled players are punished for being good because the result is the same, an unfair disadvantage. The only "unfair disadvantage" the enemy should have is a skill one, because that's what pvp games are about. Outskilling the enemy in a competition. What you are proposing will make players quit because you are punishing players for putting effort into learning how to play.

You appear to be deliberately missing (or ignoring) what has actually been said. I have not proposed an "unfair advantage" for lower tier players or an "unfair disadvantage" for higher tier players. Only a means by which lower tier players will have a better chance to play in game with reasonable results against higher tier players. I must reiterate: when a game is no longer fun the players who are being discriminated against will leave and the reputation of the game will become worse and worse. This is what history has already shown us.

Further let us be clear: The "Comp" environment is something wholly different which the less than T1 players will likely never (or extremely rarely) be involved in. Remember when talking "professional" gaming only the very top players compete since the prizes are very often monetary in nature and require an investment of personal time and money far above general gaming,

I have yet to see "NBC", "CBS", "ABC" or any other reputable professional network carry coverage of MWO Comp tournaments. I would be very surprised if I ever do.

Edited by MegaBopper, 13 January 2024 - 03:47 PM.

[kalashnikity]

Bud Crue, on 13 January 2024 - 02:48 PM, said:

You are right, I should not have characterized non T1 players as "bad" (I consider myself pretty bad, and I am certainly not a T1 player). But still, the question remains: why introduce any system to allow lower tier players a reasonable chance to compete with upper tier players when the whole system is designed to keep them apart from one another? By your own narrative above, the system appear to be working as intended, with only a "less than 3% of the time" error rate. Pushing a handicapping system on to the game based on something that occurs so rarely just seems rather extreme.

That is appreciated, but you are the wrong person to be apologizing, you're just repeating "their" terminology, as I probably have too occasionally, sometimes sarcastically. And I apologize too.

[MegaBopper]

kalashnikity, on 13 January 2024 - 03:34 PM, said:

[redacted]

Agreed! Too true.

Edited by Ekson Valdez, 15 January 2024 - 06:31 AM.
quote clean-up

[kalashnikity]

IDK how I feel about nerfing overall stats based on tier, it's an interesting idea.

It's certainly not the dumbest idea I've seen, there is a long and distinguished list of those.

If done like that, I would make it into something more like a 20 tier system, so there would not be a big jump between tiers. Give it a slight logarithmic curve too, and make it different from the match making tier. So you would still match make as if you were 3 tier even if you were 3.1 tier. anybody able to stay in 0.1 tier would truly be earning that slot, for sure.

Only problem I see is occasionally I actually try to play to my full potential (when I'm not goofing off) and actually climb into one of the current meta builds... all in the same night.

Out of 7 accounts half of mine are t3 and half at T2 which is where I hang out when solo que and actually trying hard.

The only other confounding issue is (based on past playing) if I team up with even a group of t3 and t2, we get to T1 very rapidly, but if I went back to solo I would fairly rapidly get back to T2 or T3.

It actually seems like it might work.

True T1 solo players (which I am generally not) will hate it, because it will make it a little harder harder to curb stomp T3-4-5 when they occasionally get matched up. That may be the best selling point.

[MegaBopper]

kalashnikity, on 13 January 2024 - 03:55 PM, said:

IDK how I feel about nerfing overall stats based on tier, it's an interesting idea.

It's certainly not the dumbest idea I've seen, there is a long and distinguished list of those.

If done like that, I would make it into something more like a 20 tier system, so there would not be a big jump between tiers. Give it a slight logarithmic curve too, and make it different from the match making tier. So you would still match make as if you were 3 tier even if you were 3.1 tier. anybody able to stay in 0.1 tier would truly be earning that slot, for sure.

Only problem I see is occasionally I actually try to play to my full potential (when I'm not goofing off) and actually climb into one of the current meta builds... all in the same night.

Out of 7 accounts half of mine are t3 and half at T2 which is where I hang out when solo que and actually trying hard.

The only other confounding issue is (based on past playing) if I team up with even a group of t3 and t2, we get to T1 very rapidly, but if I went back to solo I would fairly rapidly get back to T2 or T3.

It actually seems like it might work.

True T1 solo players (which I am generally not) will hate it, because it will make it a little harder harder to curb stomp T3-4-5 when they occasionally get matched up. That may be the best selling point.

I agree with much of what you have said. As I noted above the handicap would be reduced proportionally to the player's statistics (PSR for example) not by tier level. I think that would accomplish what you are suggesting.

Edited by MegaBopper, 13 January 2024 - 04:08 PM.

[Rosarius]

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 04:05 PM, said:

I agree with much of what you have said. As I noted above the handicap would be reduced proportionally to the player's statistics (PSR for example) not by tier level. I think that would accomplish what you are suggesting.

Who would you choose to be your Handicapper General?

[MegaBopper]

Rosarius, on 13 January 2024 - 04:51 PM, said:

Who would you choose to be your Handicapper General?

I would build it in as an inverse ratio formula in the system that would be driven by PSR. No one needs to sit as "Handicapper General". Such types of appointments in the past have in my opinion been counterproductive.

Edited by MegaBopper, 13 January 2024 - 06:26 PM.

[kalashnikity]

MegaBopper, on 13 January 2024 - 06:26 PM, said:

I would build it in as an inverse ratio formula in the system that would be driven by PSR. No one needs to sit as "Handicapper General". Such types of appointments in the past have in my opinion been counterproductive.

Nerf damage done by all weapons in quick play on a weak logarithmic scale, say something like. Not too much, but enough to give a slight curve. And make the peak of T1 (i.e. T0) be the most prestigious handicap.

But curve dmg done back up for total rewards at the end, so they don't get shorted on rewards, so the multiplier only works during the QP match.

x/1 at T5

x/1.025 at T4

x/1.05 at T3

x/1.1 at T2

x/1.2 at T1

x/1.4 at T0

It's important to make it a gentle curve, with possibly near infinity granularity, so there is no big step between tiers.