60 replies to this topic

[Kasiagora]

It was mentioned by Yoseful on another thread that he thought there should be only a few assault mechs on each battlefield compared to the more plentiful medium mechs that are used for front line bashing – which makes sense to me.

This made me think of another MMOFPS where in each battle you could only have a couple of commanders, a few snipers, a few machine gunners, and everyone else would have to take a grunt with a bolt-action rifle (which, as it turns out, is a darned useful class and I often times find myself preferring to a specialized role due to adaptability).

My question is this! How would the community here feel about something like this being implemented in MWO? Let's say there's 3 lances to each side, and in each battle when you choose what unit you want to bring, there can be only 1 Commander, 3 Missile Boats, 3 Scouts, and the other 5 have to take non-specialized mechs like the Shadow Hawk or Thunderbolt that's made to do a bit of everything (and is still by no means a bad thing). And in private teams maybe you could go into a game as a group and already have your roles picked out for yourselves.
This would keep from having 12 Atlases slugging it out against 12 other Atlases, because the Lyran Commonwealth can't fight itself every day, now could it?

Anyway, I'm just wanting to hear thoughts and opinions on this concept.

[CeeKay Boques]

I'm not sure if I want PGI to balance it, or the game.

What I mean is for the 12 Atlas team to be so horribly blind and slow, that they are withered from range by a diversified team, that you take other mechs wtih ablitiies because you will just lose, again and again if you don't. I would not want 11 Atlases and a Raven to be as powerful as a diversified team. (lets say one of those Atlas's is a Command Mech). I'm hoping that the game play itself is so dependant on a diversified team that you are a fool to stack Assaults.

If that dosen't work, then yes, force it upon us with limits.

What if Cbills and XP worked with weight limits though?

XP+CBills = Win amount/Damage-Weight difference. On a personal level, that could work as well.

Raven wins, gets 40xp and 100kCbills- Weight difference

Atlas wins, gets 30Xp and 75kCbills- Weight difference

[Famous]

I'm not a fan of PGI imposing limits on the lances we bring to the fight. If they've set up role warfare anywhere near what they're promising that will sort everything out itself. From what they've told us there should be no way a 12 Atlas team can handle a diverse enemy.

For me (and probably other lone wolves) I really don't want to have to bounce from lobby to lobby because I'm working on my (insert 'Mech class or chassis) and the room is already full.

Now obviously if 2-3 weeks after release we are seeing everyone running Assault chassis then maybe PGI could consider placing restrictions, but I'd like to give their system a chance to shake itself out.

[Pheonixwolf]

Upsides---- it would make for a more interesting game-play, hopefully give everyone a chance to try it out?

downsides-- what happens to those who have specialized in commander role and can't use it in a given match? that persons playstyle is screwed up making them less effective than normal, or they reconfigure how their mech is set-up and skills they've spent time building up are now useless.

suggestion--- impliment company/lance organization roles and match players based on desired position 'i.e. front-line lance/ commander or fire-support/ assault/defender, ect,ect' with random determinations for those wanting to fill commander roles.

suggestion--- implement match-making based on company VS. company weight comparison 'i.e. a company that weighs 600 tons should probably face another company that weighs 550-650 tons'

suggestion--- give option to face opponents who out weigh group.

Edited by Pheonixwolf, 30 April 2012 - 10:53 AM.

[Volthorne]

I don't want to see ANY restrictions on how many of X weight class you can pick for your lance. That's just dumb. The reason behind it is that if the limit is in place, people will find a general company setup that beats everything else (except duplicates) and a week from then EVERYONE will be using the exact same company setup. You want repetitive? you got it, bub.

I say let those companies of Atlas' fight each other. Not only would it be entertaining, but it would be just about the most balanced fight you could find. As for a company of Atlas' vs. a mixed company? I'd love to see what happens to your company (read: how fast they get ripped limb form limb) when the Atlas' get into brawling range (which they WILL. It is an inevitability, Mr. Anderson).

Edited by Volthorne, 30 April 2012 - 10:53 AM.

[Garth Erlam]

Keep in mind there's a pseudo Rock-Paper-Scissors thing that happens in all games of this nature: Close up brawlers (default Atlas') tend to lose to Indirect-fire support (default Catapult) tend to lose to direct-fire support (default Awesome) tend to lose to fast brawlers (Jenner F) tend to lose to defense (Swayback) tend to... etc. None of this is a foregone conclusion, but as a rule, slow heavy hitting close ranged entities lose to fast, ranged indirect fire entities. It's a lot like medieval warfare in that respect.

So yeah, 12 Atlas' would have a hard time against anything balanced (4 Recon, 4 Awesomes, 4 Catapults would absolutely decimate them) but might beat something else. That said, some kind of mixup is beneficial; Adding even a single spotter to a team of Atlas' suddenly multiplies their abilities.

So yeah we could force specific weight limits, but as it currently stands, you benefit from not stacking with one weight class.

At least that's my take on it

[Hollister]

Garth Erlam, on 30 April 2012 - 10:54 AM, said:

fast brawlers (Jenner F) tend to lose to defense (Swayback) tend to..

We demand pictures of said swayback.

[Orzorn]

Hollister, on 30 April 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

We demand pictures of said swayback.

You can see it in the mech drop video in the background.

[Helmer]

From Bryan http://mwomercs.com/...post__p__180371


"Re: OP Matchmaking will help with balancing teams/tonnage/BV etc. We haven't revealed the full formula, as we are still tuning and testing the best way to handle it."




Cheers.

[Kasiagora]

Famous, on 30 April 2012 - 10:46 AM, said:

I'm not a fan of PGI imposing limits on the lances we bring to the fight. If they've set up role warfare anywhere near what they're promising that will sort everything out itself. From what they've told us there should be no way a 12 Atlas team can handle a diverse enemy.

For me (and probably other lone wolves) I really don't want to have to bounce from lobby to lobby because I'm working on my (insert 'Mech class or chassis) and the room is already full.

I guess my concern stems from that I've been playing a bit of that new Tribes game lately, and even though there's deathmatch modes abound, and a whole team of heavies can't win in capture the flag, you still get a TON of games where you go in and find yourself being the only person trying to capture the flag while everyone else is doing DM with nothing but Juggernauts. You'd think they would catch on, but they don't. I mean, they REALLY NEVER LEARN. I think that particular game isn't doing as much as it could to dissuade this though. They could make flag caps and protecting your flag carrier worth more points than a straight kill, but whatever. I don't like imposed limits either. Although, I've noticed in Battlefield you have less immaturity than in Call of Duty, and in Red Orchestra you have less than in Battlefield, so simply by making a game more of a focused simulation you narrow your fan-base to people who actually appreciate the game more already.

One of my thoughts is that if you do have your own company of friends, you can choose your mechs before hand and go in with friends already ready in your roles. This would probably be unfair to lone wolves who these companies would need to utilize to fill numbers in non specialized roles though. Another thought is private servers or matches, but I'd also be afraid of elitism and douchebaggieness stemming from such things. It sounds, in my mind, like a very precarious tight-rope to create for a gaming community!

Oh yeah! How could I forget Battle Value! Also, I know that many games are finding free-to-play to be very successful (far more so than people just a couple years ago would have imagined), but charging a very small monthly fee such as $9 a month would filter out a lot of the kids who use their allowance to play a game and then just sit on comms trolling the other players.

Thanks for the link, Helmer!

Edited by Kasiagora, 30 April 2012 - 11:13 AM.

[Kenyon Burguess]

we all know the golden rule of restrictions.

the more you add to party organization, the longer the time u spend waiting for someone to show up and then wait a second time in the mission queue

[AdamBaines]

Garth Erlam, on 30 April 2012 - 10:54 AM, said:

So yeah we could force specific weight limits, but as it currently stands, you benefit from not stacking with one weight class.

At least that's my take on it

But that's just in a case where your assaults are all in the same role, right? What it your all assaults, but you have Mid Range Sluggers (Atlases), Long Range Weps (Awesomes), indirect fire support (Stalkers), Command (Cyclops), and Fast Mover Spotter (Chargers)? I mean in essence that's what the Ellises like right? The Long Wall. (This is assuming that all of the listed mechs above are available even).

It seems to me what will really keep people from grabbing all assaults for a drop is if they have limited choice in assaults. If you only have an Atlas and a Awesome available to you, then it will force people to chose the traditional support mechs for indirect fire, spotting/scouting and etc. But if they give players a broad choice in the Assault or even Heavy class, people might stop using the lighter platforms.

I cant wait to see their solution to all of this. I'm sure it will rock.

Edited by AdamBaines, 30 April 2012 - 11:18 AM.

[Volthorne]

Kasiagora, on 30 April 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

I guess my concern stems from that I've been playing a bit of that new Tribes game lately, and even though there's deathmatch modes abound, and a whole team of heavies can't win in capture the flag, you still get a TON of games where you go in and find yourself being the only person trying to capture the flag while everyone else is doing DM with nothing but Juggernauts. You'd think they would catch on, but they don't. I mean, they REALLY NEVER LEARN. I think that particular game isn't doing as much as it could to dissuade this though. They could make flag caps and protecting your flag carrier worth more points than a straight kill, but whatever.

Excuse me, but I have a problem with this. Grabbing the flag rewards points (which varies on speeds - 250 up to 1000). Capping the flag yourself rewards 1200, assisting is 500. Kills are only 200-300 points AT MOST (barring multi-kills). I have no clue what server you're playing on, but every Tribes game I play has an incredible variety of classes.

Edited by Volthorne, 30 April 2012 - 11:37 AM.

[Famous]

AdamBaines, on 30 April 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

But that's just in a case where your assaults are all in the same role, right? What it your all assaults, but you have Mid Range Sluggers (Atlases), Long Range Weps (Awesomes), indirect fire support (Stalkers), Command (Cyclops), and Fast Mover Spotter (Chargers)? I mean in essence that's what the Ellises like right? The Long Wall. (This is assuming that all of the listed mechs above are available even).

It seems to me what will really keep people from grabbing all assaults for a drop is if they have limited choice in assaults. If you only have an Atlas and a Awesome available to you, then it will force people to chose the traditional support mechs for indirect fire, spotting/scouting and etc. But if they give players a broad choice in the Assault or even Heavy class, people might stop using the lighter platforms.

I cant wait to see their solution to all of this. I'm sure it will rock.

I think be biggest weakness of a lance configured like that would be visibility. That lance is going to be much taller and wider than a mixed lance and cannot use cover as effectively. This might seem like a minor consideration, but it allows the mixed lance to pick off the Assault lance by bits and pieces

[Havoc2]

Rift actually had a nifty LFG tool that allowed a person attempting to create a group to specify which roles they were looking for.

I.E a healer would select LFG and that filled the healer role, which would leave 2 DPS and a tank slot open (which filled as players joined).

PGI could have something similar for PUGs in which a pilot was flagged as a certain role (commander, scout, brawler, support etc) and as someone who was specialized in that role joined the lobby, another slot was removed.

The only thing I don't like about this is it would kind of "force" balanced teams. If a unit wants to run 12 Atlases or 12 Ravens, or 6 and 6 they should be able to if they so choose SO LONG AS that grouping doesn't end up being the end-all-be-all group make-up of the game.
If it does, something is broken.

Famous, on 30 April 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

I think be biggest weakness of a lance configured like that would be visibility. That lance is going to be much taller and wider than a mixed lance and cannot use cover as effectively. This might seem like a minor consideration, but it allows the mixed lance to pick off the Assault lance by bits and pieces

I think back to MPBT:3025 and taking out heavies and assaults with the BJ.
Open map, run forward until in range, open up with the AC2s and back pedal. The big boys either had to run and hide, or continue charging.

Being the biggest and baddest doesn't make it the best. Not for every situation anyway.

Edited by }{avoc, 30 April 2012 - 12:00 PM.

[Dnarvel]

This really won't be a problem, as bringing a diverse group into a large battle is more favourable than brining in an all assault or all support group. In order for players to make the most of MW:O, they will have to balance themselves, otherwise they will be destroyed. THe devs have stated the game is one of balance.

[AdamBaines]

Famous, on 30 April 2012 - 11:51 AM, said:

I think be biggest weakness of a lance configured like that would be visibility. That lance is going to be much taller and wider than a mixed lance and cannot use cover as effectively. This might seem like a minor consideration, but it allows the mixed lance to pick off the Assault lance by bits and pieces

Agreed. My thought as well, but the Charger can get up to 84 kph (3025 version of course. With 3049 tech it will be a bit more) and you could equip with recon gear. Of course that nothing compared to the Jenners, Commandos and Ravens of the world, but the extra armor should help when doing recon.

Im for balance anyhow and wont run with an all Assault crew. Thats no fun. :-)

[AdamBaines]

}{avoc, on 30 April 2012 - 12:00 PM, said:

Being the biggest and baddest doesn't make it the best. Not for every situation anyway.

Agreed, but when the biggest and baddest can be flexible with their load outs, that's the issue. The one thing assaults will never really be able to do that the lighter classes can do is really high top speed, and thats what they will have to take advantage of.

[Joe Mallad]

My idea of having say more light mech compared to your larger Mech was not meant as a restriction. What I was getting at in the other thread where i brought this up is... It was always written or shown in the readings that a light Mech production facilitie could push out 4 times the amount of Mech an Assault facility could... That's a given. What I mean is make it a bit more difficult for someone to get the larger Mech as they would have to have the skill and or level to pilot such a Mech. Most Mech jocks don't start off in a heavy or assault anyway. Your average Mech jock starts his career in either a light or medium Mech. Now as for players steeping up in the commander roles... I think that should be decided between the players of the unit or group and not based on if you have a large or assault compared to those that have a light or medium. Because I sure as hell can bet you that I and many others can lead a force just as well from the comfort of my lighter mech as the next guy in his heavier Mech. Many great leaders and squad commanders in the Battletech/MW Universe have had long glorious careers leading from the cockpit of a lighter mech.

[Solis Obscuri]

Kasiagora, on 30 April 2012 - 10:20 AM, said:

This would keep from having 12 Atlases slugging it out against 12 other Atlases, because the Lyran Commonwealth can't fight itself every day, now could it? Anyway, I'm just wanting to hear thoughts and opinions on this concept.

Well... they aren't really known for the competence of their command staff...

But no, that does sound much more like the FWL.