79 replies to this topic

[Vlad Ward]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 11 December 2012 - 02:46 PM, said:

That is an interesting thought, and I partially agree. If ECM wasn’t introduced the exact same time as 8v8, it would be teams of Streak Cats dominating the playing field.

When 8v8 opened up the Public TS server was filled with 8-man PUG dropships. Now there are very few because a random group of 8 people cannot coordinate a solid ECM team and would rather go back to matchmaker balanced fights, rather than play against the same exact build every match.

Until we see some need for unit diversification or a forced matchmaker, non-unit players are not going to be interested in unbalanced 8v8 matches.

NOTE: a voip PUG teams vs. and ECM team is at an even greater disadvantage than the old premade vs. pug matchups. Not only does ECM outright negate a large number of weapon systems, it takes away the main advantage of voip, which is focused fire. Currently there is no incentive for your average player to join an 8-man team, and even House Units and Mercenary units are going to be turned off from constantly battling the exact same enemy team composition, especially if they don’t have to resources to field the only counter to ECM (that being more ECM).

You can still focus fire when the enemy team has ECM. There's nothing stopping you from targeting normally and calling Letters once you're within 200m. You can also just say something like "Shoot that Atlas on the hill. The one on the left with the gaudy, pink paint job. Yeah, that one." when you're trying to snipe from >200m.

Despite all the hullabaloo, I've run across maybe 3 2/0/0/6 Raven+D-DC teams ever. My team's drops tend to consist of a good chunk of Mediums, and we run across plenty of varied teams and strats when we play. Even when we do run across heavier teams or ECM spam teams, they're really not that hard to beat.

I don't want to turn this thread into another ECM thread, but I think this is really just getting silly. Even if every other team on the planet is running the same, stupid cheese build, does that mean we should all just give up and call it a day?

No. It means we need to put our big boy caps on and build a team that eats cheese for breakfast. Call it a Mouse team. Then when there are too many mice, people will invent the Cat team. When there are too many cats, people will invent the Dog team.

Edited by Vlad Ward, 11 December 2012 - 03:08 PM.

[repete]

Kraven Kor, on 11 December 2012 - 02:51 PM, said:

...You drop against a group - you finish match at same time. Most likely, it takes approximately the same time to ready back up for both teams, so you drop again - and face the same team since they are "synched" with you and dropping at about the same time...

I would imagine there is potential for the drop frequency to align between two different teams due to the prep time as you've outlined. BUT, we were also having conversations and some administrivia between drops so our drop frequency was erratic The only drops we got during those times were those same teams, or "match not found", so I suspect it was more influenced by the low number of 8v8 teams available at the time than simple sync based on being ready in similar time frames. So as speculated, if low available teams impact the ability to find matches then, in theory, adding additional requirements like tonnage / BV (Let alone any potential future options like 1PV / 3PV or regional servers), could get hard to find matches some time. Guess we'll see.

[repete]

Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 03:07 PM, said:

No. It means we need to put our big boy caps on and build a team that eats cheese for breakfast. Call it a Mouse team. Then when there are too many mice, people will invent the Cat team. When there are too many cats, people will invent the Dog team.

Essentially you're saying "adapt". At least you're not saying "L2P". ;-)

Trouble is, as a battlefield commander, you want to mitigate the randomness of battle as much as possible. You want your plan to win, and your opponent's plan to fail. So sure. You build a group specifically to out-do the flavour of the week. But you may find that that plan, while working well against 4 ECM Commandos and 4 D-DCs, it doesn't work against something else. Many (Most?) min-max for the sweetspot. Two common sweetspots at the moment are 'base-rush under ECM' and just straight out direct fire 'brawling' (Because it negates ECM, BUT is hard for some due to ping / netcode, etc.), both of which many people are just describing across many threads as "boring".

As far as that sweetspot / min-maxing is concerned, two opposing forces are:

• Specialisation leads to extinction
  
• Jack of all trades and master of none

I'm sure the stats PGI are getting around most popular mech, most popular weapon, most common way to kill /die, average tonnage of an 8v8 a group, the trend in 8v8 and 4v4, wins via cap v. kill, etc. since the 6th are interesting.

Edited by repete, 11 December 2012 - 03:23 PM.

[Daekar]

As far as Comstar TS3 puggers not running 8-mans, that's only partially true, at least from my observations. Since Phase2 dropped, I have heard from several people that they tried it and liked it, some that they tried it and got rolled, and then there are those like me whose self-evaluation leaves them with the conclusion that trying 8v8s is a waste of time for skill and ADHD-mech choice reasons. On the other hand, I noticed that a drop in the EU TS3 population during my play hours correlated with Phase2. Those players may have joined actual teams in an effort to make 8v8 rewarding.

Personally... I think all you hardcore structured-build optimized group 8v8ers are nuts. Even if I had the skills (which I lack) to hack it in that level of play, it still would be way too limiting and no fun. If I can't try crazy builds and bounce between mechs like a superball whacked with a bat, I get bored.

[IamTheEggMan]

Repete, I didn't read the rest of the posts so no idea if it was said, but, goes to show how many pilots out there don't want an actual challange. Instead they prefer to stroke there egos. Played a few 4s last night when everyone bitched out on 8s and most games were 4 premade+ 4 premade vs whatever, everyone back in there "stomping" builds running round playing 100ton COD.

[repete]

IamTheEggMan, on 11 December 2012 - 03:20 PM, said:

...but, goes to show how many pilots out there don't want an actual challange. Instead they prefer to stroke there egos.

Yes, and no. IF, (one of) your objective(s) is to grind at the moment so you have a stable of mechs ready for CW, grinding is faster in 4v4.

EDIT: w00t. 100th post!

PS - As mentioned earlier, the 'Best of X' type of result of dropping against the same team multiple times might be cool as a game mode in future. Again, would probably require that 'queue' option. One of the things that was cool in the multi-match drops we had was, you could indeed adapt each game, and that adaptation was what would swing the result one way or another. It is sometimes frustrating to lose, try to learn from it, and then find the next match is completely different, your plan didn't work, and then not knowing how much impact the fact that they outweighed / outgunned / out-ECMed you impacted the result.

Edited by repete, 11 December 2012 - 03:32 PM.

[Vlad Ward]

repete, on 11 December 2012 - 03:16 PM, said:

Essentially you're saying "adapt". At least you're not saying "L2P". ;-)

Trouble is, as a battlefield commander, you want to mitigate the randomness of battle as much as possible. You want your plan to win, and your opponent's plan to fail. So sure. You build a group specifically to out-do the flavour of the week. But you may find that that plan, while working well against 4 ECM Commandos and 4 D-DCs, it doesn't work against something else. Everyone min-maxes for thesweet spot. Two common sweetspots at the moment are 'base-rush under ECM' and just straight out 'brawling', both of which many people are just describing across many threads as "boring".

As far as that sweetspot / min-maxing is concerned, two opposing forces are:

• Specialisation leads to extinction
  
• Jack of all trades and master of none

I'm sure the stats PGI are getting around most popular mech, most popular weapon, most common way to kill /die, average tonnage of an 8v8 a group, the trend in 8v8 and 4v4, wins via cap v. kill, etc. since the 6th are interesting.

Going in thinking you have an end-all build to win every fight is silly.

And honestly, the level of Min/Max in the game right now is extraordinarily low. People complain about it like the teams that are winning are just a bunch of no-life grognards who eat, drink, and breathe Mechwarrior in order to have the absolute best builds in the history of ever.

That's just not true. I know with my corps, we all just mess around and play whatever the hell we want. We still roll 90% of the other teams in 8v8s. Our officers? Mostly college students and grad students; engineers, physicists, and computer scientists. We don't slave over the Mechlab for days to find a perfect build. We just end up with pretty good builds because it's a video game and arithmetic is easy.

I'm sorry, but in the end all I can say is that practice makes perfect. Excuses are contrary to improvement.

[Orzorn]

Lefty Lucy, on 11 December 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

Yep. Despite all the cries of "we don't care about our W/L record we just want to play with 8 of our friends"... well it turns out they really, really care about their W/L record.

Mhm.

I've had some of the best fun in 8v8 so far, though, and many of the very best games we actually lost! Last night we had a stand off in Frozen City. Lasted 6 minutes before either team made a move, and when we did oh boy did all hell break lose. They ended up winning by cap (stupid Ravens are impossible to hit. My gauss would play the animation, have the paper doll flash, and he wouldn't take any damage from it) after almost everyone was dead, but it was a great game. Why? Because without losing once a while, the game would be very, very boring. You might as well go play level 1 computers in Smash Brothers if you want that.

I say let them be wimps. I'll be having fun over here.

Edited by Orzorn, 11 December 2012 - 03:35 PM.

[PropagandaWar]

[color=#222222][color=#222222]Well if peeps are ECM pug matches and syncing every match with the exception of 1 we beat the snot out of em and that was when I was playing with 5-7 pugs. I figured it was other pugger lol. I think in the last week I have had two failed to find matches in 8v8. One was on Sunday. I must be lucky time zone wise. However I didn't play one last night. We had an opportunity too but with only 9 peeps on around 10pst it seemed pointless to go through all the gyrations for one or two matches at most. [/color][/color]

[I WildCard I]

Lefty Lucy, on 11 December 2012 - 02:00 PM, said:

Yep. Despite all the cries of "we don't care about our W/L record we just want to play with 8 of our friends"... well it turns out they really, really care about their W/L record.

While im sure that there are others out there that have this mindset, it isnt the majority. It is the quality of the match that counts. Ive dropped lots of 8 mans since the latest patch, with general success. Yes playing with my teammates is great, facing a lance of 6+ Atlas DDC's and getting rolled is not. ORRR theres always the chance it turns into a base rush...another outcome which I believe sucks the fun out of playing.


So get your own atlas you say? Adapt, become a competitor and stop QQING?

My thoughts exactly, I did pilot my Own DDC with my lancemates and won over a dozen like this.

Okay cool how fun some wins right? Not really,I dont want to pilot an ATLAS, and guess what 3 of my lance wouldve rather jumped in the cockpit of somthing else as well.

So I guess what I am saying is that people want to do things that make this experience unique and fun. (After all to have fun is why were all here) Fun is not being forced to adapt a playstyle that isnt your own to win. Pass.

That is the current state of 8v8's

Maybe when ECM popularity dies down hopefully this ridiculous dynamic will follow.

[Vila deVere]

Had an 8-man running this AM. Very few matches running it seemed. We had one game against a team 8 ravens, all equipped with ECM. Kinda fun, I guess, but not what I want to play regularly. Vast majority of launch attempts ended with "failed to find match." had to give up when one of our 8 had to go. So far, the 8 v 8 queue is not mpressing me.... C'mon CW.....

[Sevaradan]

haven't seen this happen 8v8 any more than it would randomly fail in the past pre matchmaking p1 or p2.

[Orzorn]

I WildCard I, on 11 December 2012 - 03:37 PM, said:

So I guess what I am saying is that people want to do things that make this experience unique and fun. (After all to have fun is why were all here) Fun is not being forced to adapt a playstyle that isnt your own to win. Pass.

That is the current state of 8v8's

Maybe when ECM popularity dies down hopefully this ridiculous dynamic will follow.

Ya'll need to adjust you play, then. We usually run only a single Atlas on our team, and at most 2 ECM (one Raven or Commando and one Atlas). We win most of our games (easily 8/10) if we aren't being sloppy.

The key is to run lots of direct fire weapons, especially long range ballistics. Ravens can't lag-dodge them all, and Atlas mechs get chewed to pieces before they can get to you (lots of D-DCs I see run shotgun style builds).

Learn the maps as well and stay out of spots where ECM's blinding effect would hurt the most, such as choke point. Always try to force them to run across open terrain. This means staying away from the cave exits on Forest Colony, and keeping your distance (but still protecting) the hill in Frozen City.

ECM is powerful, for sure (and also needs some tweaks, as well as other weapons, so that it isn't such a hard counter to missiles), but if you reduce the systems it effects and also reduce the situations it can take advantage of (forcing them to run across open terrain, so you can spot them manually), then its essentially a 2 ton lead weight.

Last night we fought a team that was 4 Ravens and 4 Atlas mechs. They all had ECM. We stomped them into the dirt and only lost 1 guy. In fact, we fought SEVERAL teams like that last night, and every single one of them got demolished. 20 tons of equipment wasted.

[repete]

Vlad Ward, on 11 December 2012 - 03:29 PM, said:

...I'm sorry, but in the end all I can say is that practice makes perfect...

True, BUT, the quality of that practice is important. My assessment is that there are about 8 factors to analyse (Probably more really) in terms of learning from a win or a loss, including:

1 - Was the mech compliment you dropped with 'sub-optimal' (Don't be suprised if you lose if you only drop with LRM boats)
2 - Did you have a plan?
3 - Did your opposition appear to have a plan?
4 - What was the result of your plan and their plan?
5 - Did you have an experienced group of people who followed orders? (Challenging in large / quickly growing units)
6 - What as the difference in drop weights between the two groups?
7 - What was the difference in you mech's and their mech's loadouts a factor? (They had lights and you couldn't hit. They had ECM negating your missiles. You had direct fire negating their ECM)
8 - Etc.

At least from my perspective, you go in focused on the result you want, while not being so focused that you can't adapt and respond to a fluid battlefield situation.

I disagree on the level of min / maxing that is possible. 11 different mechs. 2-4 variants across three primary weapons types, times loadouts that work regardless of which map your on? I think there is already a great deal of min / maxing possible.

Edited by repete, 11 December 2012 - 03:52 PM.

[xRaeder]

Need server browsers..........

[10thMD]

8vs8 is dead because of the absolute joke the social tab is. They need to impliment a system similar to WOT to allow people who have no friends who play the game to find groups to play with.

[repete]

xRaeder, on 11 December 2012 - 03:53 PM, said:

Need server browsers..........

That depends if their objective is to provide 'server browser' experience, or an 'everyone hops in and you get a match somewhere. somehow experience'. I don't recall ever seeing a statement from anyone on just how much of the game play they expect to be quick matches v. CW. I don't know what parallels can be drawn with other games. Server browser makes me think Cod / BF. CW makes me think MMORPG. Guess we'll wait and see.

10thMD, on 11 December 2012 - 03:55 PM, said:

8vs8 is dead because of the absolute joke the social tab is...

I don't imagine anyone would necessarily disagree with that. But given the grand scheme of things, I would imagine there are things higher on the priority list than the social tab. What point is a good social tab if you've got other, high priority issues to resolve...

Edited by repete, 11 December 2012 - 04:04 PM.

[N0MAD]

I was one of the pilots droping with the OP last night and i would like to make a couple of points here.
One was the time, it was between 11pm -1am my time (Aussie here) that means between something like Midday to 2pm Euro time and 9am-11am US time. These are slow times in organised Net gaiming times as quite alot of people in EU and US are at work.
Cheese builds, cant say we really ran into that situation, our win/loss was about even all teams adapting thru the games, maybe this was due to us running into teams that were having fun and adapting. ARMD is a very large unit (i am not part of ARMD), well organised yet at no stage were people forced into fixed rolls, yes we did try to have a mixture Scouts, scout killers and strike groups, dunno if other large units force builds. I played on a public server and waiting in the Lobby i was asked by several other units if i was interested in 8v8s which i accepted and joined guys from various groups i had the same experience there.
As an old MW fan i look at players names all the time looking for old vets etc, i must say i do see alot of premades dropping into pug games often.

[IIIuminaughty]

I care about my K/D and W/L but I still love to play the game.

[Lefty Lucy]