136 replies to this topic

[Bad Karma 308]

Teralitha, on 03 December 2012 - 12:36 AM, said:

"The new 8-player group system DOES NOT have a Mech weight class balance requirement. It will be up to the player base to determine what Mech classes they wish to drop with."


I hope you have something coming up in regards to this sooner rather than later such as... a tonnage limit?

Did you really think this is what premade teams wanted? A total unbalanced free-for-all??

Add in a tonnage limit for 8vs8 premades. I suggest 500 tons.

So a team that drops together, trains together and knows the strengths and weaknesses of one another so that each member mutually supports the team; you want to now force them out of their element and make them into little more than the PUG groups the system was created to avoid, only with comms?

If a team thinks they've got what it takes to run a bunch of lights up against assaults then let them, maybe they have a tactic that hasn't been brought to bare yet. And maybe, just maybe, it just might drive more game innovation from the developers.

Regardless, you're whining about a system that hasn't even been rolled out yet! Are you really that foolish.....

Edited by Bad Karma 308, 03 December 2012 - 12:03 PM.

[FactorlanP]

I did not vote, simply because I am willing to try the upcoming version of MatchMaker before passing judgement.

I believe that there may actually be some truth in the notion that a balanced 8 man team will be more effective then a grossly overweight (or underweight) team.

[Teralitha]

Some of you seem to be assuming that the 8 atlas team will be less skilled than the 8 'lighter' mech team and are grasping at straws.

I seem to recall PGI saying that they wanted things to be even between 2 teams equipment wise, so that the only deciding factor was skill. Well that is exactly what a tonnage limit does. And a BV system would be even better.

This 8vs8 premade FFA does not promote that sentiment.

Edited by Teralitha, 03 December 2012 - 12:22 PM.

[TruePoindexter]

The weight class matching was added because random players usually don't have the coordination necessary for 8 Hunchbacks to defeat 8 Atlas's (hypothetical situation of course). 8 man premades are being setup with the assumption that they are in fact coordinated. If a team wants to run 8 Commando's then why not?

[Padic]

I think the idea here is to keep ensure that matches pop up quickly.

The more restrictions that get placed on which 8 man team can fight against which 8 man team, the longer everyone will be sitting around, drumming their fingers and hoping to get an opponent.

I assume this is also why there is no support for 5, 6 or 7 man teams.

I think the only two solutions are either to leave it completely open, like is currently planned, or to strictly require two of every weight class (or something similar).

[Teralitha]

TruePoindexter, on 03 December 2012 - 12:23 PM, said:

The weight class matching was added because random players usually don't have the coordination necessary for 8 Hunchbacks to defeat 8 Atlas's (hypothetical situation of course). 8 man premades are being setup with the assumption that they are in fact coordinated. If a team wants to run 8 Commando's then why not?

No, it was added because of this - PGI said that they wanted things to be even between 2 teams equipment wise, so that the only deciding factor was skill.

[Zylo]

Teralitha, on 03 December 2012 - 12:16 PM, said:

Some of you seem to be assuming that the 8 atlas team will be less skilled than the 8 'lighter' mech team.

I seem to recall PGI saying that they wanted things to be even between 2 teams equipment wise, so that the only deciding factor was skill. Well that is exactly what a tonnage limit does. And BV system would also.

This 8vs8 premade FFA does not promote that sentiment.

You seem very sure of this 8 Atlas team winning just based on weight.

Once the 8 vs 8 system comes back in maybe your team should try streaming some matches to prove your point. Take 8 pilots into a match with each in an Atlas. See if you win vs a roughly equal skill balanced team. I suspect you won't find things so easy when the enemy team has far more tactical options available.

[Sikosis]

I want it to be like table top when I used to play. we set a tonnage max, then you brought what ever you wanted to bring with in that tonnage, meaning you might be 1 v 2 or 10 v 4 it depended on what kind of mech you were driving and the SKILL of the pilot as well.

[Icebound]

I would prefer a free-tonnage style battle, but only after balancing issues are worked out and knockdowns are back in. Nobody wants to face an 8-Jenner or 8-Cheesecat team.

[Teralitha]

Zylo, on 03 December 2012 - 12:28 PM, said:

See if you win vs a roughly equal skill balanced team.

Here is the problem, finding a team of equal skill to test this.... unless, by chance, we field 2 teams of 8 and luckily get dropped agaisnt each other, which we will be attempting.

[ATao]

Stated it earlier, posted in suggestions... weight limit, class limit there needs to be something at least. Assaultfest with lil support from light-scout and 1-2 heavies is not what I want to play.

[Zylo]

Sikosis, on 03 December 2012 - 12:29 PM, said:

I want it to be like table top when I used to play. we set a tonnage max, then you brought what ever you wanted to bring with in that tonnage, meaning you might be 1 v 2 or 10 v 4 it depended on what kind of mech you were driving and the SKILL of the pilot as well.

If this system was used most teams would load up on light mechs just for the numbers advantage. Swarm the enemy team while sending a few extras to cap base. If it was for example 12 lights vs 8 mixed mechs, 8 or 9 of the lights could easily keep the enemy team busy leaving them unable to counter the remaining lights capping their base. Let's not even get into the balance issues that could be created by having a greater number of ECM equipped mechs...

If this was also based on player rating then mixing experienced pilots (to fight) with inexperienced pilots (to cap) would make a pretty easy win for the team with the greater number of mechs due to lighter weight of each mech.

[ski2060]

Well, keep in mind this will probably change soon. Also, this is only phase 2 of MatchMaking. We'll get Phase 3 probably 6-8 weeks from this patch if we're lucky. That will implement the full ELO skill based matches.

Then, hopefully we will see 12 man drops.

[XvDraxvX]

No Tonnage Limit. Go with a Battle Value that includes the players rating like a ELO system.

[HRR Insanity]

Simple idea: Multiple 'queues' for 8v8. Initially, start with an 'unlimited' queue and a 500 ton queue.

As people play more, you can add additional queues... 350, 450, 550, etc. Almost like weight classes for combat sports.

This sets the game up very well for the Community Warfare add-ons. You could imagine that during a 'Planetary Assault' that there might be a few days phase of 'scout drops' (minimum number of drops to be considered 'real') leading to an advantage or disadvantage for the assaulting force. This would then set the tonnages for the 'initial invasion' phase... the results of that would then set the tonnages for the 'city assault' phase... leading to the 'final assault'. Much credit to the MW4 planetary leagues for testing this out...

So:

HRR is hired to assault Planet X. We do 2-3 days of scout drops 300A (attacker) vs. 300D (defender) and manage to break even (5-5). Unfortunately, we didn't get a significant scouting advantage which gives the defenders a slight tonnage advantage for the upcoming phase. Tonnage for Phase 1 will now be 450A vs. 500D. Had we managed to win 2/3 of the scouting missions, we might be able to break even (500A vs. 500D) or even have a slight advantage (510A vs. 500D).

HRR managed to win 50% of the Phase 1 fights despite the tonnage differential. This sets up a big advantage in Phase 2. .... etc.

Community Warfare should be iterative and based on team tonnage over time. This makes individual fights matter yet also forces people to vary their loadouts and builds based on maps and the environments.

Implement team tonnage now. You'll need it later to make Planetary Assaults epic.

Insanity

[Zylo]

Teralitha, on 03 December 2012 - 12:32 PM, said:

Here is the problem, finding a team of equal skill to test this.... unless, by chance, we field 2 teams of 8 and luckily get dropped agaisnt each other, which we will be attempting.

Even then it's not totally accurate since both teams would be expecting it.

The true test is just a large number of random drops using those same 8 players each in an Atlas. You will probably hit some teams of greater and lesser skills but you should get a pretty good idea based on the results.



I suspect the results you will see as 8x Atlas vs a balanced team:

Greater skill on other balanced team = Killed or capped by other team, not even a close fight.
Equal skill on other balanced team = Killed or capped by other team 2 out of 3 times but over all close fights.
Lesser skill on other balanced team = Easy win unless your team gets careless. Likely to only lose on base cap.

[Zylo]

HRR Insanity, on 03 December 2012 - 12:43 PM, said:

Simple idea: Multiple 'queues' for 8v8. Initially, start with an 'unlimited' queue and a 500 ton queue.

I like this, expanding on this idea a bit this could easily be a multiple checkbox selection to allow for faster matchmaking for those of us who don't care about limits but also fit within the 500 ton limit.

[x] Launch with no tonnage limit.
[x] Launch with 500 ton max limit.

I wouldn't mind having the option to drop outnumbered as well. Taking 6 or 7 mechs into a 500 ton drop against a team of 8 could make for some interesting fights.

[Kyrie]

I look forward to the challenge of unrestricted 8v8. The challenge will lie in preparing for all eventualities trying to build the right lances that apply the right set of tactics. Building "ideal" sets of 8 to face god-knows-what, adapting tactics once you see the enemy --- this will be priceless.

[Teralitha]

Kyrie, on 03 December 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

I look forward to the challenge of unrestricted 8v8. The challenge will lie in preparing for all eventualities trying to build the right lances that apply the right set of tactics. Building "ideal" sets of 8 to face god-knows-what, adapting tactics once you see the enemy --- this will be priceless.

An Ideal set of 8 to deal with god-knows-what would be... 2 of each.

2 lights(70 tons)
2 Mediums(100tons)
2 Heavy(130tons)
2 Assault(200tons)

= 500 tons. See? I am a math genius....

You could make the 2 lights commandos, and have 20 tons to give to the mediums, upgrading them to 2 dragons. or upgrading the 2 catapults, to 2 cataphracts.... the possibilites are unlimited.... all within a 500 ton limit.

Edited by Teralitha, 03 December 2012 - 01:38 PM.

[PropagandaWar]

ill still be in my Hunchy SP and P Cent 9a and occaisonally that Phract. At first I was upset about the whole thing but I want to be a better pilot and the assault fest will help me. Will still be annoyed about the non trippable lights.