272 replies to this topic

[Void Angel]

Ruediger Steiner, on 19 August 2024 - 10:06 AM, said:

Don´t even bother to answer. We are done here.

There are two principles in play here: controlling context, and the principle of charity. The original comment you took exception to was in response to your anecdote about having 90% of your matches be stomps. Now, in that context, and applying the principle of charity, it's pretty obvious that he thought you meant you lost 90% of your matches; thus the proper response was something to the effect of "No, I meant that 90% of my matches turned into stomps, not that I lost 90% of them. I think the game mode is unbalanced based on my experiences last night."

Smokefield misunderstood your post, but it was your immediate recourse to disparaging commentary and meme-posting in lieu of explanation that derailed the conversation.

[The Angle]

I'm hopeful that PGI has learned from this debacle to leave the core Quick Play formula alone...these 8 v 8s are a niche for people more serious about the game and hardcore tactics.

I get the feeling most of us are PUGs or at best a group of 2-4 friends just messing around. We choose Quick Play so we don't have to enter into hardcore min/max tactical play style. The very essence of QP in every multiplayer game is for something fun and easy you can drop into not necessarily to win every match or die trying.

[Void Angel]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 18 August 2024 - 02:56 PM, said:

To be clear, I think a lot of puggies don't even know who the better players are. Even back in the poptart era there were a lot that copied the "meta" and thought they were way better than they were because their use of "meta" against "non-meta" inflated their scores.

You could tell which ones were aping the meta, too. They'd just run to their favorite sniper spot and bounce up and down until they died in place or won the match. The good players would flank, maneuver, and come after your cookies.

[Geoker]

My first post ever, and after playing this game for only a few months, I'm just going to say I absolutely love this mode. Feels like you have more impact as an individual mech on the course of the match. I just popped up behind two mechs with my Charger 1A1 on HPG and blasted them. DPS matters in this mode, sustained DPS even more, and SDPS builds are just more fun to play.

[Crohnic]

I've enjoyed the event and noticed a lot of the in game strategy has changed due to not having the extra lance. The bigger maps sometimes feel a tad too big though. I can't say for sure, but it seemed like match maker was slightly better, maybe a few less stomps and more even matches until it became 5 vs 4.

I wonder what the game and player numbers would have looked now like if Tiyos et al, along the cauldron, would have had a hand in the game's development in the early days before half of the player base was chased away.

[Asylum Choir]

It would have been nice if this was OPTIONAL.
i AM NOT ENJOYING THIS, All it takes is just 2 people to not play ball with the team or do something stupid and it HURTS.
I can't relax whilst playing, I have to be 100% on it ALL the time.

Edited by Asylum Choir, 19 August 2024 - 07:12 PM.

[Bronze Dragon]

Tiy0s, on 17 August 2024 - 06:12 AM, said:

Maybe we’ll see more 8v8 down the road, maybe we won’t. If we do, I’m confident that we can get it right with more experimentation.

Yup, as was prophesied. 'Everythings fine, nothing to see here. You're all wrong we know what we are doing.'

You cannot polish a **** and this one has been floating since beta; back when there was x4 and x8.
If its so wonderful an option then why does it have to be mandatory? You have regional settings, let people have match settings. Let the duelers have Solaris and just leave QP alone.

[Bronze Dragon]

FRAGTAST1C, on 16 August 2024 - 08:41 PM, said:

Pretty sure PGI will take the "data" from this and say, "No, see? We were right all along. Groups and Solo play well together in 12v12 only! Making 8v8 with a group of 3 won't matter 'cause 8v8 doesn't work AT ALL!"

*sigh*

You were 100% right.

[McMatt]

Nimnul, on 16 August 2024 - 03:58 AM, said:

Many players suffer every day because they can't choose a mech after choosing a map. Now people take a close build and get to a long map. Take a long, get to a close map. The game would be more interesting if I could prepare myself for the battle on each map as much as possible. It's quite easy to do. If I was on asalt, then I can choose asalt, if it's important of the same weight.

I like the idea. And we should really have an option to select mech based by the map. But ... Suddenly we would have on some maps all LRM builds, on the other all snipers ...

[NebelGrau]

smokefield, on 19 August 2024 - 09:46 AM, said:

...
totally inaccurate. we won being 2 mechs down, we lost with 4 mechs advantage. you just try to throw a stone with no reason except you losing some games...
...

It´s rather obvious that losing 1-2 mechs at the start (dc, afk, getting killed) has more impact in a 8v8 than in a 12v12, right?
It´s just harder to compensate.
Yes, a 12V12 will also start to snowball some satge of th emacth... but not in the first 2 minutes!

[Stitchedup]

please make this misery stop

[Damiiiit]

I said this event was sad in my first post. In my mind it was nothing but some call to arms for the comp teams to fine tune there builds using the general MWO population as fodder and test subjects.for several hundred avail drops. In this I believe MWO was very successful. Personally I play an average of 10k games a year in MWO, I may play 20-30 different mechs a day, and with 400+ mechs, I was not going to go change the builds on any of those mechs to participate for 4 days then have to change them all back. Also, I was set to purchase a couple of supporter packs, one for me and one as a gift, but your offering me up as forced fodder has put a nix on that.

I am not against 8v8. But, it is a different game, requiring a different mental approach, different builds, and TEAM play. You have not been training us for 8v8 but 12v12.

[Davion Carlyle]

FRAGTAST1C, on 19 August 2024 - 07:22 AM, said:

5. The event succccckckkakskskaks. We hates it, we hates eet!. Stooopeed developerses (Ok, I admit for this part I couldn't resist Gollum )

My reply :- Guys, seriously, please consider how this 8vs8 was deployed. No tonnage balance, 3-man groups are actually 4-man groups, matchmaker overflowing with nonsense, etc., Consider the following :-

(A) The tonnage was properly balanced

(B ) The groups limited strictly to a 2-man with a high Min and low Max tonnage as well as only one group per team

(C) Matchmaker properly assigning ELO equally among both teams

(D) Groups being matched against groups as a priority

Can you honestly tell me that if A-to-D was properly implemented, 8vs8 wouldn't be fun?

This is something I can definitely see as working against the current version of 8v8.

They didn't do a great job at all at propping this up and giving it the best possible chance to succeed. Hopefully the feedback from the forum will make it better.

[ChipWit]

8V8 as it stands is brutally awful.Groups dropping into qp queue is even more unbalancing. Makes for frustrating gameplay. Please don't run this again unless you make some sweeping changes to how the queue is executed. It makes ME not enjoy MechWarrior Online and want to play just about anything else.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Davion Carlyle, on 20 August 2024 - 05:36 AM, said:

They didn't do a great job at all at propping this up and giving it the best possible chance to succeed. Hopefully the feedback from the forum will make it better.

The feedback from the forum hasn't been particularly useful, it has been pretty overwhelmingly a knee-jerk reaction and lack of separation of issues (for example the messed up matchmaking should be decoupled from 8v8 itself, yet few are able/willing to make that distinction). Throw in the fact that the trigger word of "comp" and some people were immediately never going to give it a fair shake.

The real struggle is that the community has been torn between this for years now because people want different things out of the game and that impacts a lot. Some people want a tactical shooter, where bad play is actually punished more, while others want battlefield with robots where the only rule is chaos and there is little reason to bother getting better (because for better or worse, the more chaos there is, the less skill matters).

[reddeadeye]

If this mode is implemented, it would be best if weight limits were attached. I had a couple of matches where a LB-20 SR just steamrolled the opposing team I was on. If your team didn't bring enough assaults or heavies to the match over the testing period, your side generally lost. I saw some adaptation to the new mode over the weekend, but generally players played as if it were 12v12. Some were just outright selfish and wouldn't play for the team. A competent 4-man group could easily win a match for their side, no question. It would be best to segregate groups into their own queue from solo queue if this mode were implemented, or reduce the group size to 2. The player base isn't what it was two years ago and 2-3 players generally carry the rest in 8v8 whereas it takes more like 4-6 to contribute to a win in 12v12.

These are just my observations as a hardcore player. I'm not going to get severely passionate over a game that effectively died when PGI put it in maintenance mode. It's nice to see the passion in the posts, but if you are going to criticize, offer constructive criticism, please. It's obvious when people don't like change, but as was stated, it was an experiment. If it goes 8v8, and people vote with their feet, so be it. The game is already dead. Your leaving will just make its demise sooner rather than later. If you are really passionate about the game, find a way to keep it alive in a state you can live with.

[NebelGrau]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 20 August 2024 - 06:32 AM, said:

The feedback from the forum hasn't been particularly useful, it has been pretty overwhelmingly a knee-jerk reaction and lack of separation of issues (for example the messed up matchmaking should be decoupled from 8v8 itself, yet few are able/willing to make that distinction). Throw in the fact that the trigger word of "comp" and some people were immediately never going to give it a fair shake.

The real struggle is that the community has been torn between this for years now because people want different things out of the game and that impacts a lot. Some people want a tactical shooter, where bad play is actually punished more, while others want battlefield with robots where the only rule is chaos and there is little reason to bother getting better (because for better or worse, the more chaos there is, the less skill matters).

What a sophistic way to claim "8v8 is for good players; 12v12 is for bad players who don´t want to become better".... lol
I had some more matches today and it´s totally frustrating and annoying.
You know hat the stratetgy of you "good" players in 8v8 is?
Just yolo an Assault into the enemy group as meat bait. Because of the lower numbers it takes ages to kill such (usually) dump playstyle. Result: team gets ripped by the other mechs of the enmy team.
And no, it´s not an option to ignore that assault.
Whichever team sacrifices an assault first wins... *golfclap*

[Quicksilver Aberration]

NebelGrau, on 20 August 2024 - 07:07 AM, said:

What a sophistic way to claim "8v8 is for good players; 12v12 is for bad players who don´t want to become better".... lol

I didn't say 8v8 is only for good players, not to make things diametric since skill is a scale but people who are bad but want to learn how to be better typically enjoy 8v8 as well. Either way, look at the complaints about 8v8, "too sweaty", "I can't play fun builds", "I just want to shoot robots". This is telling of players who want a more casual game experience and don't like the more competitive side of this game, which is one of the things that battlefield as a series traditionally excelled at, it was effectively the party game FPS even compared to CoD which up until recently was also still pretty casual oriented.

NebelGrau, on 20 August 2024 - 07:07 AM, said:

I had some more matches today and it´s totally frustrating and annoying.
You know hat the stratetgy of you "good" players in 8v8 is?
Just yolo an Assault into the enemy group as meat bait. Because of the lower numbers it takes ages to kill such (usually) dump playstyle. Result: team gets ripped by the other mechs of the enmy team.
And no, it´s not an option to ignore that assault.
Whichever team sacrifices an assault first wins... *golfclap*

If an assault noobcharges into the enemy and there isn't a group, that assault did so without request, and them feeding had nothing to do with why you lost because more often than not, that assault is throwing their mech away for no reason. That said, brawling is overtuned because it was balanced with 12v12 in mind.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 20 August 2024 - 07:28 AM.

[FlamingBeard]

Horrible idea to force this to everyone. 12 vs. 12 is way better than 8 vs. 8. Next time to an event queue and just leave QP as it is. Gladly it's over very soon so I can get back to QP.

[Ruediger Steiner]

Just make a new game mode 8vs8 called "Group Quick Play". Solo players and groups up to 8 people allowed.
Reduce the groups in QP to two players max.
Done. Everybody is happy.