97 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

Void Angel, on 24 September 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

I did warn you.

In teeny tiny letters! So the troll wouldn't hear. It doesn't like reading, and tends to skim things that are small.

Yes. Yes you did.
I ended up having to place him on my ignore list.
He's actually the first person to make it there in all my time on MW:O...
So did Shar Wolf in the end...

[Void Angel]

Some people embrace the idea that as long as their arguments make sense to them, they must always be correct, and just embarrass themselves through life. It's sad, but you can't save them from themselves.

[_____]

Aww...you two high fiving each other on an internet forum is really cute. You guys should take a family portrait

[Tesunie]

Void Angel, on 24 September 2014 - 05:31 PM, said:

Some people embrace the idea that as long as their arguments make sense to them, they must always be correct, and just embarrass themselves through life. It's sad, but you can't save them from themselves.

It ended up being a problem when we argued the same thing, and I literally could just quote my previous response or two and answer the post in detail... (Then he PMed, me, and that was when I called it quits. Wont go into PM details though...)


Back on topic, the Nova Prime (Stock) is an excellent representation of more guns don't equal more damage. Sure, it technically equals more damage! For... the one (maybe two) volleys you get off (unless you are really careful about how you use those lasers). Can we say melt, and I don't mean the target...

[Void Angel]

I can personally attest to the fact that an unmastered Nova will melt itself down to amber internal structure after just one alpha strike - and that's on Frozen City.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Just think about how bad it was in the older games or TT with the 30 heat cap.

There may have been versions of MW2 with a 40 point cap, but the version I played was 30 - cause the ERPPC jumped you to 50%.

[L Y N X]

Glad we were able to guide this discussion back on topic.

Balancing weight, heat envelope, ammo, hardpoints, and the variety of weapons to give a new player something to do at every range is important. It can often lead to longer match life expectancy and higher match scores with more assists, damage, kills and wins.

Edited by 7ynx, 24 September 2014 - 08:15 PM.

[Stickjock]

Back on topic is where this discussion should stay...

[SethAbercromby]

I think even the whole nonsensical discussion leads back to

1) Figure out what the 'Mech does well and where it has trouble
2) Design a loadout that builds on the 'Mechs strenghts and/or helps overcoming its weaknesses
3) Test the build in life fire by either dropping solo (which I wouldn't reccomend for most builds, as there are too many variables that can mess with your data) or in groups (especially reccomended for support-type builds)
4) Evaluate your experiences. If you feel your 'Mech is performing awkward or is not doing what you expected it to do, it's back to the drawing board. If you like the overall feel, but think there's some room for improvement, try to figure out what it is that doesn't fit into the overall picture and solve it from there.

5) If it works for you, it works for you. There are no bad builds when they work for your play style and are performing sucessfully. For the sake of discussion, it's improtant to be able to explain why and how it works to be able to teach others about these quirks, if they do not happen to fit into the Meta mold.

[Alaskan Nobody]

SethAbercromby, on 27 September 2014 - 05:20 AM, said:

3) Test the build in life fire by either dropping solo (which I wouldn't reccomend for most builds, as there are too many variables that can mess with your data) or in groups (especially reccomended for support-type builds)

Some testing can be done in the appropriately named "Testing Grounds"

Note the "some testing"

[L Y N X]

SethAbercromby, on 27 September 2014 - 05:20 AM, said:

it's improtant to be able to explain why and how it works to be able to teach others about these quirks, if they do not happen to fit into the Meta mold.

I hope I have done that for those readers that read this thread. If I have not please let me know what gaps I have in my communication?

[SethAbercromby]

7ynx, on 27 September 2014 - 10:51 AM, said:

I hope I have done that for those readers that read this thread. If I have not please let me know what gaps I have in my communication?

I was summing up the entire discussion into one simple tl;dr of 'Mech building, sorry if that sounded to you like I was explicitly directing that at you. There's just the minor things that everyone of those meta knights took offense on and has by now been talked to death.

If I had to complain about your opening post, I think "enhanced" is where most people took offense on. You always trade one thing for another, so it really boils do to what works and what doesn't.

And I'm overexaggerating here, but just to gather all the small things people like Blackhawk keep picking up on (though they always find an excuse to do so anyways), you potentially accidentally generalized other 'Mechs as being overly hot and the other thing is that less weapons == more damage can be a bit strange for people to pick up on. Less weapons == more consistent damage can avoid a lot of the trappings while being probably more accurate in context.

Take that as you will, I really had to put in effort to find point to nitpick on, so don't worry too much about it.

[_____]

Maybe it's a small thing, maybe not, depending on your perspective. The whole point of this thread and other advice threads to begin with is to optimize builds. Trading weapons for heat efficiency is one such optimization which is the point of the thread. Then the OP almost does a 180 to add a weapon that, under which the condition that the build is intended to be used, does nothing. I've no problems if he wants to continue running these builds, I've seen much worse. But I do have a problem with a "new player" post saying one thing and saying the complete opposite thing in the very same post, even if it was unintentional. If you see my post history you'll see I've posted a lot to New Player Help with what I think is useful advice. These guys are veteran players and they should know better.

Regarding solo vs group, my observation is that builds that do well in solo will also do well in groups of less than 5 or 6. Unless you're intending to drop in 6-12s all the time, solo is an effective way of testing your builds and your playstyle.

Edited by BlackhawkSC, 27 September 2014 - 04:32 PM.

[SethAbercromby]

BlackhawkSC, on 27 September 2014 - 04:23 PM, said:

Maybe it's a small thing, maybe not, depending on your perspective. The whole point of this thread and other advice threads to begin with is to optimize builds. Trading weapons for heat efficiency is one such optimization which is the point of the thread. Then the OP almost does a 180 to add a weapon that, under which the condition that the build is intended to be used, does nothing. I've no problems if he wants to continue running these builds, I've seen much worse. But I do have a problem with a "new player" post saying one thing and saying the complete opposite thing in the very same post, even if it was unintentional.

Sure, the "adding an LRM to brawlers" paragraph didn't need to be in there, but technically it's not incorrect. Trading a direct fire weapon for a LRM launcher transletes to less weapons being used at a time. You won't be firing LRMs while brawling and you don't start shooting your lasers when firing LRMs at indirect targets. It is more heat efficient and still allows him to keep fighting outside of his optimal range.

Quote

If you see my post history you'll see I've posted a lot to New Player Help with what I think is useful advice. These guys are veteran players and they should know better.

I will not try to sort though all threads to find any posts that can be considered useful advice to prove or disprove that statement. Your "bad tactics by map" thread is hardly fleshed out and seems more like a complaint dump for stupid things that happened. It's dangerous to try poking holes into other people's boats without taking care of your own.

Quote

Regarding solo vs group, my observation is that builds that do well in solo will also do well in groups of less than 5 or 6. Unless you're intending to drop in 6-12s all the time, solo is an effective way of testing your builds and your playstyle.

I do not like solo for that simply because it is an unreliable way to gather teammates and people tend to do very dumb things sometimes. It's hard to feel your way into a build when your team is falling apart before the fight has even begun. Trying to coordinate 6 individual groups at worst is much more reliable than coordinating 12 individuals.

[_____]

SethAbercromby, on 27 September 2014 - 05:03 PM, said:

Sure, the "adding an LRM to brawlers" paragraph didn't need to be in there, but technically it's not incorrect. Trading a direct fire weapon for a LRM launcher transletes to less weapons being used at a time. You won't be firing LRMs while brawling and you don't start shooting your lasers when firing LRMs at indirect targets. It is more heat efficient and still allows him to keep fighting outside of his optimal range.


I will not try to sort though all threads to find any posts that can be considered useful advice to prove or disprove that statement. Your "bad tactics by map" thread is hardly fleshed out and seems more like a complaint dump for stupid things that happened. It's dangerous to try poking holes into other people's boats without taking care of your own.


I do not like solo for that simply because it is an unreliable way to gather teammates and people tend to do very dumb things sometimes. It's hard to feel your way into a build when your team is falling apart before the fight has even begun. Trying to coordinate 6 individual groups at worst is much more reliable than coordinating 12 individuals.

When you're brawling you want to get high DPS, whether it's damage over time or frequent high alphas. So why not add extra heatsinks so you can do that better? It's so easy to counter a small LRM launcher that in most cases it's just wasted tonnage. This was my suggestion in my first post.

My bad tactics by map thread is half entertainment, half guide. You should have read that part I'm sure. I could possibly write a wall of text explaining every possible situation that could occur and why it might not work out the way it statistically works out, but that's not my intention. Like with all guides, the advice you give is not guaranteed, but statistically it works out in your favor. Meta is not meta because it's 100% win, but it gives you a better chance of winning. I'll leave others to figure out and debate what's right and wrong, but my purpose is to give my opinion.

Solo can be frustrating and really random for sure, but it's a good way to gauge your individual performance. I've seen a lot of highly competitive players play solo -- and then lose. But think of it another way, they are getting some data for their group matches when it actually matters.

Edited by BlackhawkSC, 27 September 2014 - 05:25 PM.

[SethAbercromby]

BlackhawkSC, on 27 September 2014 - 05:17 PM, said:

When you're brawling you want to get high DPS, whether it's damage over time or frequent high alphas. So why not add extra heatsinks so you can do that better? This was my suggestion in my first post.

Because not always are additional heatsinks needed/required. I've had situations where I've come to a very good balance of heatsinks to weapon heat but was a few tons short. Adding more heatsinks would have been negligible and armor can only be stacked that much. If I see a reasonable appliance and space for an LRM10 in that situation, sure why not?

Unless you are running something extremely hot like 4xERLL, there is uausally no need to stack 20something heatsinks. My Stalker 5S that is configured for all range support can run mostly heat neutral with some intelligent grouping while still generating decent DPS and gives me multiple options to burst additonal damage for a bit of heat. Dropping any of the equipment for more heatsinks feels unessecary.

Edited by SethAbercromby, 27 September 2014 - 06:03 PM.

[_____]

OK first, 2xLRM10 is not "a small launcher". You're a support mech so your build makes sense, even though I think the streaks are a little weird. Anti-lights maybe, but whatever. Second, remember we're talking about brawlers not support mechs like your 5S. Since the build he mentioned was a brawler, I'm thinking he's using AC10, AC20, LB10X, SRMs, med lasers. Those are hot, except the LB10X - but you'll have other weapons in addition to that. You'll pretty quickly build up enough heat to require cooldown.

Even if you're not a brawler, I've never seen builds other than dual gauss or maybe pure AC5 builds that couldn't get higher DPS from additional heatsinks.

While 1 or 2 additional heatsinks have a small effect. They're non-negligable.

Edited by BlackhawkSC, 27 September 2014 - 06:59 PM.

[Tesunie]

SethAbercromby, on 27 September 2014 - 05:56 PM, said:

Unless you are running something extremely hot like 4xERLL, there is uausally no need to stack 20something heatsinks. My Stalker 5S that is configured for all range support can run mostly heat neutral with some intelligent grouping while still generating decent DPS and gives me multiple options to burst additonal damage for a bit of heat. Dropping any of the equipment for more heatsinks feels unessecary.

Hum. I really like that Stalker build. Very similar to my own Stalker 3F, but different at the same time. I don't normally see many people who field this style of loadout.


I also feel that, when making a mech, one should consider not only it's performance and effectiveness on the battlefield, but should also consider the "fun factor" of the mech. It doesn't matter if the mech runs "perfectly", if it's not fun for you to play it. This is a game after all.