Jump to content

Selecting Mechs Appropriate To Each Map


19 replies to this topic

Poll: Mech-Map Selection (49 member(s) have cast votes)

Would you like the ability to select a particular chassis after knowing the map you'd be dropping on?

  1. Yes - Assuming there is a system to allow for that. (34 votes [69.39%])

    Percentage of vote: 69.39%

  2. No - I prefer the current system. (15 votes [30.61%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.61%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 PASHA

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2022 Gold Champ
  • CS 2022 Gold Champ
  • 149 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 05:32 AM

As we know with MWO, we cannot change Mechs once we select one and click the search icon. I'd like to suggest something radically different that might drastically improve the MWO experience and make things more user-friendly, assuming of course that an algorithm can be implemented to make this happen.

What I suggest is a system whereby we pre-select a weight class to drop in, and hit the search cue button. We let MM work its magic which reveals to us the map we will be dropping in. We would then have 15-30 seconds to select a particular chassis of ours that we, the user, believe would be most appropriate to that map.

Is a system like this possible i.e. code-able? Sound appealing? Please let everyone know!

-Pasha

TL;DR:
New feature suggestion to,

1) Select weight class to drop in;

2) Cue up;

3) Wait for MM to pair you with opponents;

4) Map is revealed, giving you 15-30 seconds to select a particular Mech within your chosen weight class.


Edited by Pasha Osis, 19 November 2014 - 05:34 AM.


#2 Myke Pantera

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 836 posts
  • LocationAustria

Posted 19 November 2014 - 07:11 AM

I fear there would be too much focus on min-maxing to be honest with you...

However i would very much like it if i could select a mech AFTER the gamemode is known, but before the map is known. There are 2 possibilities to do this:

1) Dropship\Dropdeck with 4 mechs of the same weight-class and you select one of them upon game-mode confirmation. If you don't select a mech within n seconds, you drop with the first mech in your dropship. Whhile players are in the mech selection screen, the map can be loaded in the background. The map-splash-screen isn't needed anyways.
2) Select a mech for whatever game-mode you are playing prior to launch and you drop with one of them depending on which game-mode you got

I'd prefer 1) simply because it adds flair! This would allow PGI to reenable the game-mode voting system.

I still don't want to see a map-voting feature, as this would just reduce map variety.

#3 xeromynd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,022 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationNew York

Posted 19 November 2014 - 08:09 AM

Would be way too much min-maxing if you could pick the mech after you knew the map.
I think a simple veto system would be nice. You can veto the proposed map once, if there is a majority of vetos, the game selects a new map. That way you at least have a small say in a map that suits your selected mech.

(ie. "Oh it's Alpine, I'm driving my 3xLB10 Ilya, so yea...gonna veto that.....oh look I vetoed and got Mining Collective, let the games begin")

If you could pick mechs based on the map, it would just be the following:
Alpine = GAUSSAPOCALYPSE, ER LARGELASERLAND
Caustic = ULTIMATE LRMS
Therma = Energy weapons gtfo mang

#4 zortesh

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Merciless
  • The Merciless
  • 624 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 12:47 PM

View Postxeromynd, on 19 November 2014 - 08:09 AM, said:

Would be way too much min-maxing if you could pick the mech after you knew the map.
I think a simple veto system would be nice. You can veto the proposed map once, if there is a majority of vetos, the game selects a new map. That way you at least have a small say in a map that suits your selected mech.

(ie. "Oh it's Alpine, I'm driving my 3xLB10 Ilya, so yea...gonna veto that.....oh look I vetoed and got Mining Collective, let the games begin")

If you could pick mechs based on the map, it would just be the following:
Alpine = GAUSSAPOCALYPSE, ER LARGELASERLAND
Caustic = ULTIMATE LRMS
Therma = Energy weapons gtfo mang



Veto has the same problem... noone would ever play terra therma, anyone afraid of lrms would auto veto casutic.....

and alot of players would veto river city night every time.

#5 xeromynd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,022 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • Twitter: Link
  • LocationNew York

Posted 19 November 2014 - 12:55 PM

View Postzortesh, on 19 November 2014 - 12:47 PM, said:

Veto has the same problem... noone would ever play terra therma, anyone afraid of lrms would auto veto casutic.....

and alot of players would veto river city night every time.


Less of a problem though, because if you only can veto once, you could veto say, Caustic Valley, and get Terra Therma instead. I agree though that Terra Therma would be avoided anytime it's possible, maybe that would encourage PGI to do something about the size/heat of the map?

#6 MechB Kotare

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 720 posts
  • LocationHuntress

Posted 19 November 2014 - 03:27 PM

Totally yes. I think its logical to be able to adapt your equipment acording to world/terrain you were (or going to be) dropped in.

#7 Celtic Warrior

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Death Wish
  • The Death Wish
  • 507 posts
  • LocationClan Wolf Operations - Tukayyid - Honolulu HI

Posted 19 November 2014 - 04:24 PM

If we could choose a specific mech for each map type we would have alot more boating/alpha builds in game. At least as it stands I'm forced to think about how much heat my mech develops this keeps my max fire power down.

Edited by Celtic Warrior, 19 November 2014 - 04:24 PM.


#8 Draykin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Ironclad
  • The Ironclad
  • 154 posts

Posted 19 November 2014 - 09:49 PM

Speaking from a totality canon-logical sense, no. You should not get to choose your 'Mech after you know the map. Why? Because Battlemechs are expensive. People do not regularly own multiple 'Mechs. As such, when you go to fight, you don't get to choose from a selection of 'Mechs, so you try to make your 'Mech as versatile as possible to fit any situation rather than having one 'Mech for one situation.

#9 MilesTeg1982

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 255 posts

Posted 20 November 2014 - 11:02 AM

and there we go - another "I want to use mapspecific mechbuilds because I think that will enable me to kill everyone and rule the game while having completly forgotten that everyone else would use mapspecific mechbuilds too ..." -threads

seriously - if you make a ranking of complaints about the game you will find "LRM-Boats" and "Meta-Builds" right on top - allowing people to choose mechs after knowing which map will come up will only increase that.

Edited by MilesTeg1982, 20 November 2014 - 11:02 AM.


#10 MechB Kotare

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 720 posts
  • LocationHuntress

Posted 20 November 2014 - 01:44 PM

View PostMilesTeg1982, on 20 November 2014 - 11:02 AM, said:

and there we go - another "I want to use mapspecific mechbuilds because I think that will enable me to kill everyone and rule the game while having completly forgotten that everyone else would use mapspecific mechbuilds too ..." -threads

seriously - if you make a ranking of complaints about the game you will find "LRM-Boats" and "Meta-Builds" right on top - allowing people to choose mechs after knowing which map will come up will only increase that.


And here comes another "omg people want to be stronk" type of useless comment that doesnt provide any constructive critizm.

Your point doesnt make any sense, because everyone would be allowed to take a build they feel comfortable with on that specific map. You take Short range on ALpine? That is no one but yours fault.

"I wanna play all the same stupid builds on every single map, and i want to be good" much? So much for gameplay diversity.

Btw, learn who keeps crying about Meta and LRMboats and whatever, before you brainlessly decide to judge everyone by everyone.

Edited by MechB Kotare, 20 November 2014 - 01:45 PM.


#11 MilesTeg1982

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 255 posts

Posted 20 November 2014 - 02:10 PM

View PostMechB Kotare, on 20 November 2014 - 01:44 PM, said:

And here comes another "omg people want to be stronk" type of useless comment that doesnt provide any constructive critizm.


its pretty simple - allowing people to use mapspecific builds is just a bad idea which was proposed several times and did not get any better. You want constructice critizm? Before you make any proposals or support them - spend some time thinking about the consequences and don't just jump on it.

View PostMechB Kotare, on 20 November 2014 - 01:44 PM, said:


Your point doesnt make any sense, because everyone would be allowed to take a build they feel comfortable with on that specific map. You take Short range on ALpine? That is no one but yours fault.

"I wanna play all the same stupid builds on every single map, and i want to be good" much? So much for gameplay diversity.

Btw, learn who keeps crying about Meta and LRMboats and whatever, before you brainlessly decide to judge everyone by everyone.


You don't get the point at all! mapspecific builds would result in very low diversity. Since you mentioned alpine - think about how much fun this map would be with gauss/ppc-snipers only - and espeacially how much fun that would be for a newbie in a trialmech ,..

You can not deny that many people do complain about certain mechbuilds they consider having an unfair advantage and ask for MORE diversity (why do so many people ask for 3-3-3-3 MM for example?!). It does not matter wether that is justified or not, the fact remains people complain - which means they are fustrated about it)

Not knowing does at least give people a choice between a very specialized build which might turn out to be the wrong choice or using builds which work on most map.

Please tell me - in which way would allowing to use mapspecific builds increase diversity? Seriously I'm curious

Edited by MilesTeg1982, 20 November 2014 - 02:12 PM.


#12 MechB Kotare

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 720 posts
  • LocationHuntress

Posted 20 November 2014 - 03:44 PM

View PostMilesTeg1982, on 20 November 2014 - 02:10 PM, said:


its pretty simple - allowing people to use mapspecific builds is just a bad idea which was proposed several times and did not get any better. You want constructice critizm? Before you make any proposals or support them - spend some time thinking about the consequences and don't just jump on it.

You don't get the point at all! mapspecific builds would result in very low diversity. Since you mentioned alpine - think about how much fun this map would be with gauss/ppc-snipers only - and espeacially how much fun that would be for a newbie in a trialmech ,..

You can not deny that many people do complain about certain mechbuilds they consider having an unfair advantage and ask for MORE diversity (why do so many people ask for 3-3-3-3 MM for example?!). It does not matter wether that is justified or not, the fact remains people complain - which means they are fustrated about it)

Not knowing does at least give people a choice between a very specialized build which might turn out to be the wrong choice or using builds which work on most map.

Please tell me - in which way would allowing to use mapspecific builds increase diversity? Seriously I'm curious


Being allowed to adapt you builds to the map you drop into? That itself clarifies the word diversity. Yes, Alpine would most likely be used for Long range because its logical. But those same builds fail drastically on River City for example. And opposite.

Planning? Strategy? That all only support diversity of the gameplay. When you dont simply take "meta" builds because you'd get ***** hard and instead you take a long range weaponry.

Or switching a full sniping drop deck to more adapted one for other map types, sizes terrain.

Success of RL moderwarfare depends on planning and strategy as well. You dont invade a building with assault Rifles, but SMGs instead. You are not trying to destroy a US Navy Battle cruiser with a tank...

I'd probably be quiet if you already wasnt able to choose whatever you like in whatever map you are about to be dropped in, via private matches.

Private lobby supports this for Comp gameplay. What harm would it really be to implement this feature for Pug/Group queue, i still fail to see. Sorry

You pug a lot right?

"Meta" term btw, is being highly misinterpreted by noobs and those new to this game. Before PGI implemented new maps, and new types of map, there really was a meta, because most of the maps were small, crowded with obstacles, and they pretty much supported only one "meta" build or "meta" gamestyle.

At this moment i cant really think of a build that works on all maps. Speaking as Assault/HEavy/Medium pilot ofc. NO idea about the lIghts.

Im sorry but your question as to how does ability to change "mapspecific" builds provide increased diversity of gameplay, sounds pretty crazy to me.

Edited by MechB Kotare, 20 November 2014 - 03:49 PM.


#13 SoHxPaladin

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hammer
  • The Hammer
  • 266 posts
  • LocationSleipnir Cameron

Posted 20 November 2014 - 05:44 PM

yes, vetoing the map would be nice. has it's consequences of course.

YES, picking a mech for a map would be fun *btw, you knew where you were going in the "lore" so they could change ammo counts, energy weapons if the terrain suited and they had the supplies...* but the game play per map would get stale, only because a "meta" would form, thus skill would prevail most cases...WAIT I WANT THAT!!!! HELL YES

i do truly love the idea presented MechB but i know with PGI and their focus right now, it is impossible to get that coded, tested, and put out.

#14 Kuritaclan

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 1,838 posts
  • LocationGermany

Posted 21 November 2014 - 01:05 AM

if then, there should be two mods available.

#15 The Massive

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 331 posts
  • LocationAustralia

Posted 21 November 2014 - 03:40 AM

Too much min maxing.

#16 Myke Pantera

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Storm
  • Storm
  • 836 posts
  • LocationAustria

Posted 21 November 2014 - 04:09 AM

View PostMilesTeg1982, on 20 November 2014 - 02:10 PM, said:

Please tell me - in which way would allowing to use mapspecific builds increase diversity? Seriously I'm curious


View PostMechB Kotare, on 20 November 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:

Being allowed to adapt you builds to the map you drop into? That itself clarifies the word diversity. Yes, Alpine would most likely be used for Long range because its logical. But those same builds fail drastically on River City for example. And opposite.


What MilesTeg1982 is trying to say is that the 'serious' players will prepare an optimal mech for each map. This again means that the non-optimal built players will have frustrating matches until they decide to go with the optimal mech as well to stand a chance, and this again means, that in the end there are only a few optimal builds per map per weight class that most players will play, and that lowers diversity quite a bit.

As side consequence this means that you have to have several mechs ready and fully equipped if you still want to compete, which will put off new players who don't have the gear and players with too little time to farm all that stuff in reasonable time.

It also lowers the variety of strategies, because if you drop with a sub-optimal build for a map you gotta be creative, and i'll tell you i had some very interesting matches on Alpine with Brawlers. But if every time i enter Alpine, i carry the same optimal weapon-loadout (which i have to if all the others have it) my experience of this map will be very similar each and every time i enter it.

So for the public queue, this feature will kill the game. For the group queue it might work, although even there i would limit the number of mechs you can choose from to at most 4 (your dropship), otherwise it will turn into a huge CBillsink.

To those arguing that it is natural that you adapt your gear to the circumstances... No it's not. You as MechWarrior in this universe would have one, and only one battlemech and you go through thick and thin with it... Clans can adapt better via their omnipod system, but IS pilots don't have this ability in the lore.

Edited by Myke Pantera, 21 November 2014 - 04:14 AM.


#17 Krysic

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 85 posts
  • LocationWinnipeg, Manitoba, Canada

Posted 21 November 2014 - 04:12 AM

It's a good idea. Honestly, there are several maps where a brawler is almost entirely useless. However, I believe the best solution would simply be the ability to save multiple loadouts for each variant. Short range IS Mech on Alpine anyone? C'mon we've all been there. How about a high heat, long range sniper on River City? Loadouts are the key.

Plus, how does it make sense for a Unit to drop a star on a planet with no intel? You want game breaking? THAT alone completely crushes the suspension of disbelief and makes it impossible to feel like you're part of an active combat faction.

Edited by Krysic, 21 November 2014 - 04:15 AM.


#18 MilesTeg1982

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 255 posts

Posted 21 November 2014 - 11:53 AM

View PostMechB Kotare, on 20 November 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:


Being allowed to adapt you builds to the map you drop into? That itself clarifies the word diversity. Yes, Alpine would most likely be used for Long range because its logical. But those same builds fail drastically on River City for example. And opposite.



well having 24 allmost identical builds in a match is not exactly what I would call diversity ...

View PostMechB Kotare, on 20 November 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:

Planning? Strategy? That all only support diversity of the gameplay. When you dont simply take "meta" builds because you'd get ***** hard and instead you take a long range weaponry.


really? you are talking about "Planning and Strategy" in a Pug-match? for most players in pugs that means - build a blob - however to be able to really use tactics buy using different builds you would have to form a team before you enter - are you trying to bring back groups into pugs? didn't that allready fail?

View PostMechB Kotare, on 20 November 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:

Or switching a full sniping drop deck to more adapted one for other map types, sizes terrain.

Success of RL moderwarfare depends on planning and strategy as well. You dont invade a building with assault Rifles, but SMGs instead. You are not trying to destroy a US Navy Battle cruiser with a tank...


You do understand that we are talking about a GAME here which is supposed to be FUN, it has absolutly nothing to do with RL and espeacially not with warfare - if you want that join an army and go fighting in one of the many wars - I bet you won't have fun there.


View PostMechB Kotare, on 20 November 2014 - 03:44 PM, said:

At this moment i cant really think of a build that works on all maps. Speaking as Assault/HEavy/Medium pilot ofc. NO idea about the lIghts.


Is that really a bad thing? Seriously YOU are the one asking to change that so tell me why that is a bad thing and need to be changed?

ps. watch your language kids - calling other people brainless or crazy does not really help in a discussion (well this whole threat is pointless anyway)

#19 luxebo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 2,342 posts

Posted 21 November 2014 - 06:57 PM

Map voting and a lobby hopefully I would like. The maps should be first balanced though, and then set in a way where all maps are quite equally done. I hope command wheel comes too so real strategists can set pugs in their way. For example if the leaders choose a particular strategy the people that follow get rewards and so does the commander. Good in both ways along with map veto/vote between a couple of maps. Aka lets say Therma and Caustic are in vote, then depends on what you are running (LRMs are perfect for Caustic, Cool mechs better for Therma.)

#20 Sk0h McJerdin

    Rookie

  • 3 posts

Posted 22 November 2014 - 11:42 PM

At the very least, I wish we could select from a minimum of 2 various loadouts at the map screen. think of how many times you land on a frozen world with waaay to many heatsinks... or the times you land in the desert and can only fire 1 ppc every 5 minutes... if your mech holds say 4 large lasers, you could have a loadout with 4 med lasers and extra heatsinks as an example. I wouldnt mind being stuck with the mech i selected but in EVERY classic mechwarrior game you were able to configure your mech KNOWING some details about the world you were going to dropship on, and this one sorta just skipped right over that feild.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users