26 replies to this topic

[Maikeru]

Matchmaking has had some horribly unbalanced games for me. Noobs on one team ragequit when they get slaughtered by a group of vets, and nobody wants to switch to a losing team if they are doing well. How can we fix this_

I have heard the suggestion of auto-balancing to even out the playing field, but it does have the disadvantage of punishing people who play well. What the player needs is an incentive to switch to the other team. If the player has the incentive to fight hard battles against high level mechs rather than noobs, they will do it.

What I suggest is this:

Killing a mech on your level: Average experiance gained

Killing a mech higher than your level: More experiance gained

Killing a noob: less experiance gained

NOV. 27 UPDATE:

I'd be willing to drop the last part because it does punish good players unessessarily, I think now the first two parts I mentioned are enough to prevent noobs from ragequiting. Perhaps average experiance for lower level player kills.

Experiance boost given would be devided into brackets:

1-4

5-10

11-15

15-20 and so on.


The boost I have would be small at best, but just large enough to give players incentive to prioritize fighting and learning from pros.

NOV. 28 UPDATE

Thanks to "ItsThatGuy" for point out to me the mysterious "mech mastery" number. Although I am not sure what all goes into calculating this number, I believe it would be a more accurate representation of player skill than the level of the mech they use. Therefore, I suggest a system that takes into account the opposing player's mech mastery number instead of level.

Edited by Maikeru, November 28 2012 - 12:10 PM.

[Makina]

thats actually a good idea, im down with this, even tho I always switch to the loosing team ... but im down for a auto balance system too

[AsianJoyKiller]

First off, being high level doesn't mean being good at the game.

Secondly, levels barely make a difference.

Lastly, this system punishes good players for being good. fuzzy bunny that.

[DM30]

Yes to an incentive for team switching (although I will occasionally do it already if there's a number difference). No to autobalance. I believe that players should be given choices, not forced to do things (which is why I don't like the forced matchmaker of this beta, although everyone says that's just temporary, so no big deal.)

[Cyclonus]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 25 2012 - 02:39 PM, said:

First off, being high level doesn't mean being good at the game.

Secondly, levels barely make a difference.

Lastly, this system punishes good players for being good. fuzzy bunny that.

Actually from my experience levels do make a difference. The higher level mech are always on the top of the score boards and I don't see how this is punishing the 'good' player. If levels don't make that much difference, then what's the problem with this idea_

[Analysis]

Cyclonus, on November 25 2012 - 02:41 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 25 2012 - 02:39 PM, said:

First off, being high level doesn't mean being good at the game.

Secondly, levels barely make a difference.

Lastly, this system punishes good players for being good. fuzzy bunny that.

Actually from my experience levels do make a difference. The higher level mech are always on the top of the score boards and I don't see how this is punishing the 'good' player. If levels don't make that much difference, then what's the problem with this idea_

Mech level does give a player a slight advantage, but the advantage isn't huge. The reason you are seeing higher level mechs top the leader borders is because they have played more. A person that has a high level mech will be much more accustomed to the pros and cons of a given mech and will know how to play to their strengths. A person that is level 0 has never played that mech before so they don't know kill times or how to effectively evade/dodge.

[Karaipantsu]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 25 2012 - 02:39 PM, said:

Lastly, this system punishes good players for being good. fuzzy bunny that.

I dunno, I agree with everything except the "killing a lower level" part of it.  If you remove that, it doesn't take anything away from the more advanced players, just helps the lower levels catch up, like if you switch from your lvl 20 roflScout to a lvl 4 Sharpshooter.

[Lyker]

Maikeru, on November 25 2012 - 02:34 PM, said:

Matchmaking has had some horribly unbalanced games for me. Noobs on one team ragequit when they get slaughtered by a group of vets, and nobody wants to switch to a losing team if they are doing well. How can we fix this_

I have heard the suggestion of auto-balancing to even out the playing field, but it does have the disadvantage of punishing people who play well. What the player needs is an incentive to switch to the other team. If the player has the incentive to fight hard battles against high level mechs rather than noobs, they will do it.

What I suggest is this:

Killing a mech on your level: Average experiance gained

Killing a mech higher than your level: More experiance gained

Killing a noob: less experiance gained

You sure it dosn't work like this already_

I have noticed that I get killed a lot while being a 6-scout by a lvl 12-Assult or such.
So this system should really be in there...
To me this sounds like core design together with less XP for killing the same player over and over.

Edited by Lyker, November 26 2012 - 01:53 AM.

[DarkPulse]

I feel there should be some kind of boost for killing higher level ones, but less XP for killing someone lower level is probably too much of a nerf.

[Maikeru]

Karaipantsu, on November 25 2012 - 09:51 PM, said:

AsianJoyKiller, on November 25 2012 - 02:39 PM, said:

Lastly, this system punishes good players for being good. fuzzy bunny that.

I dunno, I agree with everything except the "killing a lower level" part of it.  If you remove that, it doesn't take anything away from the more advanced players, just helps the lower levels catch up, like if you switch from your lvl 20 roflScout to a lvl 4 Sharpshooter.

AsianJoyKiller, on November 25 2012 - 02:39 PM, said:

First off, being high level doesn't mean being good at the game.

Secondly, levels barely make a difference.

Lastly, this system punishes good players for being good. fuzzy bunny that.

High level doesnt neccessarily mean being good at the game, but it is very indicative that the player has experiance with the mech. Levels make a greater difference than you would think because noobs see higher levels and instantly want to rage quit when they start losing.

I'd be willing to drop the last part because it does punish good players unessessarily, I think now the first two parts I mentioned are enough to prevent noobs from ragequiting. Perhaps average experiance for lower level player kills.

Here is an edited idea:

Experiance boost given would be devided into brackets:

1-4

5-10

11-15

15-20 and so on.


The boost I have would be small at best, but just large enough to give players incentive to prioritize fighting and learning from pros.

[Maikeru]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 25 2012 - 02:39 PM, said:

First off, being high level doesn't mean being good at the game.

Secondly, levels barely make a difference.

Lastly, this system punishes good players for being good. fuzzy bunny that.

Your fist comment takes into account the insignificant number of people who play like crazy but get no better, and is rendered moot.

High level doesnt neccessarily mean being good at the game, but it is very indicative that the player has experiance with the mech. Levels make a greater difference than you would think because noobs see higher levels and instantly want to rage quit when they start losing.

[Maikeru]

Lyker, on November 26 2012 - 01:51 AM, said:

Maikeru, on November 25 2012 - 02:34 PM, said:

Matchmaking has had some horribly unbalanced games for me. Noobs on one team ragequit when they get slaughtered by a group of vets, and nobody wants to switch to a losing team if they are doing well. How can we fix this_

I have heard the suggestion of auto-balancing to even out the playing field, but it does have the disadvantage of punishing people who play well. What the player needs is an incentive to switch to the other team. If the player has the incentive to fight hard battles against high level mechs rather than noobs, they will do it.

What I suggest is this:

Killing a mech on your level: Average experiance gained

Killing a mech higher than your level: More experiance gained

Killing a noob: less experiance gained

You sure it dosn't work like this already_

I have noticed that I get killed a lot while being a 6-scout by a lvl 12-Assult or such.
So this system should really be in there...
To me this sounds like core design together with less XP for killing the same player over and over.

If it is already impelented, it isn't implemented enough. If they were to use this idea, it would be good idea to give players a heads-up about it. I think it would help balancing problems possibly without having to resort to auto-balance.

Edited by Maikeru, November 26 2012 - 09:25 PM.

[AsianJoyKiller]

Maikeru, on November 26 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

Here is an edited idea:
Experiance boost given would be devided into brackets:

1-4
5-10
11-15
15-20 and so on.

The boost I have would be small at best, but just large enough to give players incentive to prioritize fighting and learning from pros.

I have two Lvl. 20 mechs, one Lvl. 14, one Lvl. 10, one Lvl. 8 and one Lvl. 6.

Can you see why your idea fails_

[c0mad0r]

The only thing I agree with in this entire thread is that one should receive LESS XP for killing classes below your level.

While I understand that this is an FPS and the devs want to have more fighting with less grinding and less "OP'ness" from there being higher level mechs around, PEOPLE ENJOY GRINDING... It's the e-p3n1s mentality.

TL;DR:

Make leveling a slower process

[Cyclonus]

I've been playing this game since the alpha, so it's not like I'm not really experienced. Levels do make a big difference and that still stands from my experienced with every game I play with leveled players who have a full skill tree and 'better' weapons.

[The_Silencer]

would not be bad idea earning some award for killing a pilot with, let's say, 5 more levels than you. But lemme add something... without anyone assisting you with that kill. What ya think_

Edited by The_Silencer, November 27 2012 - 07:47 AM.

[Fantus_Longhorn]

The_Silencer, on November 27 2012 - 07:47 AM, said:

would not be bad idea earning some award for killing a pilot with, let's say, 5 more levels than you. But lemme add something... without anyone assisting you with that kill. What ya think_

More xp for lone kills will just encourage players to wander off on their own. Fine in a Deathmatch but extremely annoying in team games.

[Conquistador]

I have an idea. As an ardent social-capitalist society, why don't we just raise the tax on experience earned_ We need to pay our dues to the megacorporate overlords somehow. A percentage of all experience earned is lost based on level and redistributed to all team members based on level. That way we can tax the 1% for all they're worth and reallocate that experience to the lower classes. I'm all for experience redistribution. I want my welfare experience checks in the mail.

I am the 99%!

(Also I'm being sarcastic. It's a shame I have to spell out literary devices on the internet.

This thread contains some terrible ideas that would encourage skilled players to create new accounts or buy new mechs just to troll newbie players. Additionally don't forget the skill tree is incredibly impotent right now and there's very little difference between mechs of different levels since the skill tree nerf, so all this talk of reward and punishment is utterly fallacious.)

Edited by Conquistador, November 27 2012 - 10:33 AM.

[The_Silencer]

Fantus_Longhorn, on November 27 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

The_Silencer, on November 27 2012 - 07:47 AM, said:

would not be bad idea earning some award for killing a pilot with, let's say, 5 more levels than you. But lemme add something... without anyone assisting you with that kill. What ya think_

More xp for lone kills will just encourage players to wander off on their own. Fine in a Deathmatch but extremely annoying in team games.

Mostly yep.. although I'm one of those who think that in the future Kills and "Assists" will be handled differently in DM as in the rest of game modes. You mention to encourage players to wander off on their own. I'd like to mention on why rewarding players who are mostly focusing on stealing kills from other pilots. Not an issue, IMO; but I'd like to know what you guys think on this..

[Maikeru]

AsianJoyKiller, on November 26 2012 - 10:27 PM, said:

Maikeru, on November 26 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

Here is an edited idea:
Experiance boost given would be devided into brackets:

1-4
5-10
11-15
15-20 and so on.

The boost I have would be small at best, but just large enough to give players incentive to prioritize fighting and learning from pros.

I have two Lvl. 20 mechs, one Lvl. 14, one Lvl. 10, one Lvl. 8 and one Lvl. 6.

Can you see why your idea fails_

AsianJoyKiller, on November 26 2012 - 10:27 PM, said:

Maikeru, on November 26 2012 - 08:58 PM, said:

Here is an edited idea:
Experiance boost given would be devided into brackets:

1-4
5-10
11-15
15-20 and so on.

The boost I have would be small at best, but just large enough to give players incentive to prioritize fighting and learning from pros.

I have two Lvl. 20 mechs, one Lvl. 14, one Lvl. 10, one Lvl. 8 and one Lvl. 6.

Can you see why your idea fails_

No_ I assume you are pointing out that you are a pro even if you have a level 6 mech, but that line of thinking assumes that every mech handles the same, which they do not. Please be more specific if you want to make a valid counter-arguement, no offense. I would be happy to have a real discussion if you present me with one.