Jump to content

Meta Builds And "frankenmechs"


25 replies to this topic

#1 Shar Wolf

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Defiant
  • The Defiant
  • 7,853 posts
  • LocationAlaska!

Posted 09 December 2013 - 01:22 PM

WARNING: This is going to be phrased very badly much worse than I want it to as I just took allergy pills

I have often wondered about the 'meta' builds people post.
If for no other reason that most of them have always been 'one button wonders'

The PPC stalkers... (to me: slow unmaneuverable easy targets at their highest)
The Pop-tarts... (strong tendency toward tunnel vision making them relatively easy to flank)
Splat/Streak Cats....

Currently the "meta" dislikes LRMs, and I have been mocked repeatedly for my Centurion builds on account of mounting them, which has always confused me.
The "Zombie" Centurions have always had big weaknesses to those who can actually aim (top of the head, and a narrow band around the waist that both counted as CT from any angle, not to mention the 'crotch' issue)
My build was developed after playing for several hundred matches, considering how I found myself playing most: a lot of sitting on cap points just around a hill from the fight, where LRM's indirect fire made them more valuable than literally any other weapon in the game.

People tell me, LRM are only good en-masse!
and I wonder.... if everyone on a 12 man took a single LRM5... that would be 55-60 missiles, which is generally considered a decent amount (5x12=60 -5 for the spotter)
A mass of Stalkers with a pair of LRM5 gives you 60-120 missiles, almost all of which are going to hit the CT (because LRM5 has almost no spread), for 5 tons worth of equipment each, assuming 1 ton of ammo.
The downsides to LRM I am constantly told about, are either outright bunk in my experience or easy to counter save one.
ECM counters their value... ever hear of dumbfire, the PPC, or a scout with BAP/ECM?
AMS renders the LRM5 useless.... not when EVERYONE on your team launches one no. (I see that in PUGS sometimes, and 12 mans are supposedly much better coordinated than PUGS)
They can get in cover.... in which case, keep one guy launching LRM5 in their direction and they are out of the fight for the duration, no?

What is more: people mock what they call Frankenmechs (mixed buids: IE a stalker with LRM/SRM/Large and med lasers.... IE a STOCK build) but I have found my best success is them - taking the stock builds and working to optimize them (trading the 1 LRM10 for 2 LRM5.. adding DHS and the like)
Not only has the 'infamous' Ghost Heat, not touched any of my mechs, it has actually made them more effective, as people keep trying to work around them with their one button wonders.
(Gauss+PPC.... 2AC5+PPC)
Other than for those who's mouse only has 1 or 2 buttons, I cannot think of much advantage
that the 1 button wonders generate that a mixed build could not do just as well.

There was more, but alas... I cannot remember it (will come back if it occurs to me)
Am I missing something here?

#2 SniperCon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts

Posted 09 December 2013 - 02:19 PM

One of my favorite builds is this frankenmech. It prefers to be popping srm volleys at bigger mechs, but can ping from long range with the AC2 or chase down lights (not by itself) with the MLas. It NEVER uses all 3 weapon systems at once (too hot) but it doesn't need to depending on which role it's playing. Even though it could be better at long range (2 AC2) or light hunting (SSRMs) or brawling (STD engine), IMOthe cost of not being versatile is greater than the dead weight from not specializing.

#3 Shar Wolf

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Defiant
  • The Defiant
  • 7,853 posts
  • LocationAlaska!

Posted 09 December 2013 - 02:27 PM

View PostSniperCon, on 09 December 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

One of my favorite builds is this frankenmech. It prefers to be popping srm volleys at bigger mechs,


Not overly fond of SRM on my Centurion... but that comes from the aforementioned spending a lot of time just out of LoS ;)

View PostSniperCon, on 09 December 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

IMOthe cost of not being versatile is greater than the dead weight from not specializing.


Is it sad that my brain is not functioning enough to translate this sentence? :P

I think it means that you feel versatility is worth more... :P

#4 sneeking

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,609 posts
  • Locationwest OZ

Posted 09 December 2013 - 02:43 PM

my favorite at the moment is a 127kph centurion with ac2, a pair of streaks and medium lasers.
four weapon groupings for it, loads of fun.

#5 sneeking

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,609 posts
  • Locationwest OZ

Posted 09 December 2013 - 02:49 PM

View PostSniperCon, on 09 December 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

One of my favorite builds is this frankenmech. It prefers to be popping srm volleys at bigger mechs, but can ping from long range with the AC2 or chase down lights (not by itself) with the MLas. It NEVER uses all 3 weapon systems at once (too hot) but it doesn't need to depending on which role it's playing. Even though it could be better at long range (2 AC2) or light hunting (SSRMs) or brawling (STD engine), IMOthe cost of not being versatile is greater than the dead weight from not specializing.


dude , we are very close.

except I wedged xl350 in and went streaks.

nice one ;)

#6 SniperCon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts

Posted 10 December 2013 - 01:14 AM

View PostShar Wolf, on 09 December 2013 - 02:27 PM, said:

View PostSniperCon, on 09 December 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

IMOthe cost of not being versatile is greater than the dead weight from not specializing.

Is it sad that my brain is not functioning enough to translate this sentence? :P

I think it means that you feel versatility is worth more... :)

At long range the SRMs are dead weight and for close range alphas the AC2 is dead weight (low alpha). At long range the build only contributes 38 tons (50 - 12 srms+mlas). At close range the build only contributes 42 tons (50 - 8 ac2). However, the cost of not being versatile could be that you contribute 0 tons at critical points in the match.

Hence the cost of not being versatile is greater than the cost of the dead weight.

Same goes for the LRM 5 idea. At the cost of 3 tons in some situations you can contribute in situations you would otherwise be useless, like when capping.

Edited by SniperCon, 10 December 2013 - 01:19 AM.


#7 SniperCon

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 243 posts

Posted 10 December 2013 - 01:19 AM

View Postsneeking, on 09 December 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

dude , we are very close.

except I wedged xl350 in and went streaks.

nice one :)

I played that for a while too. I felt it was too weak against assaults to make up for the advantage over lights. Without streaks it does make it very hard to solo lights, but it still has the speed and lasers to contribute in light hunts.

#8 sneeking

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,609 posts
  • Locationwest OZ

Posted 10 December 2013 - 01:43 AM

its good in a support roll, toe to toe with bigger mechs its not a good idea.

distract at range with ac2 then use speed to not be there if a pack of lights come looking.

blind side heavy and assult while they are engaged, my build with the 2xstreaks isn't too hot for holding down alpha in someones back for duration of about four missile bursts ( that's about time to leave anyway )

also good for running down the weakened who think they can skulk off for a quiet cap.

generally I find it a bit of all round fun, well I like it and thats what's important lol.

#9 sneeking

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,609 posts
  • Locationwest OZ

Posted 10 December 2013 - 06:06 AM

just did one kill three assist and 613 damage frozen city night conquest finishing with all body parts in tact, man it rarely goes that well.

350xl cn9-d ac2 ml streak clearly isn't useless it can run a good game.

#10 cranect

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Phoenix Guardian
  • Phoenix Guardian
  • 282 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 05:16 PM

I wish I could be more versatile but alas my mouse has only 3 buttons... I miss having 6 a lot.

#11 D04S02B04

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 131 posts

Posted 12 December 2013 - 08:44 PM

View PostShar Wolf, on 09 December 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

...


You will find a lot of those meta builds are built to fulfil a specific role.

The CN-9A is use specifically to tie up an assaulting group. Through torso twisting, it is an extremely difficult target to take down while presenting a dangerous threat to any damaged/rear/leg armour with its 3x SRM6s and 2x MLs.

The HGN-733C build mainly poptarts and engages enemy charging in. Tunnel vision is never really an issue because you position yourself to be well covered. Good players often have good situational awareness. Flanking a good player in a HGN733C is an extremely difficult task.

LRMs are good in prolonged engagements where there is no decisive push and consistent spotting can be provided with little effective cover. However, you'll find your spotters/front line mechs tend to get quickly wiped by poptarts / AC mechs while the ECM Atlas tanks it.

"Frankenmechs" are great versatile / jack of all trades build. Useful in any situation but not specialised. It is always a trade off.

I suggest you try playing with a decent 12man group and you'll see why these builds are "meta".

#12 ToxinTractor

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • The Resolute
  • The Resolute
  • 213 posts
  • LocationBC Canada

Posted 13 December 2013 - 04:22 AM

Right on man! I personally enjoy my balenced builds. Long range weapons backed up by mid and close range ones/vice versa.

However on the lighter hauls that ive been trying out lately (Cicadas and other mediums) they cant always afford to mount that many different ranges. So in those cases i often narrow it down to two ranges. either mid to long or mid to short.

However for my larger set ups like thunderbolts/stalkers/jagermechs i find that they all preform pretty comfortably when used in a mixed weapon load out.

#13 sneeking

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,609 posts
  • Locationwest OZ

Posted 13 December 2013 - 05:09 AM

in the light class you can use your high mobility to maintain the attack defence radius of a single weapon, larger classes need that weapon spread to engage more broadly in compensation for lack of mobility.
more weapons skill is needed to keep opponents at a desirable range when you cannot just run away wnd try again.

#14 Shar Wolf

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Defiant
  • The Defiant
  • 7,853 posts
  • LocationAlaska!

Posted 13 December 2013 - 02:35 PM

View PostD04S02B04, on 12 December 2013 - 08:44 PM, said:

You will find a lot of those meta builds are built to fulfil a specific role.


Big point of my rant was actually me getting tired of people telling me that the Meta builds are the only viable builds, even when PuGing, and that anyone NOT running a meta build is by default a crappy pilot.

Edit: Typo

Edited by Shar Wolf, 13 December 2013 - 02:36 PM.


#15 Mycrus

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • 3,066 posts
  • LocationFilipino @ Singapore

Posted 15 December 2013 - 05:49 PM

OP, don't care what other people think. just play your own game and have fun..

I've been around long enough to know that the people that "tryhard" get burned out and just quietly leave the game..

I run mostly balanced builds with a few cheez... In fact in all my 70++ mechs I have only 1AC20 and 1Gauss rifle..

The sad fact is that tryhards are in their own way killing the game... It takes real $$$ resources to build various weapons and mechs... The "content" is supposed to keep players occupied for a certain amount of time...

When the same drivel get repeated that X is no good or Y is "meta" good it gives the perception that only a f
ew mechs are usable... They are driving the usability of certain weapons and mechs down and PGI is not getting maximum return on the resources put in place to develop said "non-meta" weapons...

Of course - pgi is to blame for favoring certain builds and certain weapons.. But that is another rant altogether...

yes sure - when you are in tourneys and feel the need to play the few builds that you think works so be it..

Me - I will still 12-man in my COM-TDK and pug with my machine gun battlemaster... Or my XL400 boar's head :excl:.. Or my stable of locusts ;)

#16 King Arthur IV

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,273 posts

Posted 15 December 2013 - 08:45 PM

View PostShar Wolf, on 13 December 2013 - 02:35 PM, said:


and that anyone NOT running a meta build is by default a crappy pilot.


fixed:

crappy pilots can only play meta builds because they are....... {Scrap}

#17 Shar Wolf

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Defiant
  • The Defiant
  • 7,853 posts
  • LocationAlaska!

Posted 16 December 2013 - 11:48 AM

View PostMycrus, on 15 December 2013 - 05:49 PM, said:

OP, don't care what other people think. just play your own game and have fun..


Most of the time I don't care :lol:

Let me see if I can put it another way..... (not really expecting to make it any clearer though)
When I was playing WoW there was a lot of "theorycrafting" as they put it.
I would have expected a lot more of that in this game, where weight/speed/potential firepower ratios can be rather awkward for new people to grasp (I've been playing MW titles since MW2... and I still don't have the best grasp of it :lol:)
IE: People showing the 'math' of why it is good.

Instead - the only math I really see being thrown around is from posts like Konivings Heat-caps and the like.
For builds we get: its the best meta because 30-40 point alpha!!!!

And while I can see why that is powerful.... there are very strong counters to those builds, that tend to get brushed off as not being worth using because "it's not meta"

Such as people labeling the Awesome as weaker than the Stalker because it cannot face-tank like the Stalker can - despite at least one Awesome (not overly familiar with the chassis yet as I have not driven them... yet.) being a far superior missile boat by most standards. (IE more tubage, speed, and arm-mounted tag potential)

Add to that the concept that if it doesn't 'boat' it is by default a bad mech (which was around for Mech:4 as well)
On the other hand those vocal people whom I beat with my 'frankenmechs' tend to accuse me of cheating or sync-dropping. :wub:

People confuse me frequently.... :lol:

#18 Arahantius

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts

Posted 10 January 2014 - 12:04 AM

Agreed. As I've pointed out in other posts, this labelling and judging by unimaginative players will drive any fresh players away.

#19 torturous

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPip
  • 95 posts
  • LocationMech bay

Posted 10 January 2014 - 05:24 AM

great read pilots.

many things to ponder on my next mech build.

Knowledge is power

#20 DONTOR

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • The Ironclad
  • The Ironclad
  • 2,151 posts
  • LocationStuck on a piece of terrian in my Commando

Posted 10 January 2014 - 09:25 AM

Ahh good post, quite refreshing. I too love to see the meta warriors complain about things like LBX 10 being worthless so on so fourth. But there are weapon combinations they dont try, that are as good, and in some circumstances better than a pinpoint alpha build. Ignorance isnt always bliss.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users