322 replies to this topic

[Koniks]

Phil Tackett, on 17 February 2015 - 11:16 AM, said:

Players chilling on the reverse side of a hill waiting for enemies to crest so they get the first shot before enemy weapons can come to bear on them? That IS a napoleonic tactic, and I see it used to great effect in this game on a regular basis. Modern combat tactics are most definitely applicable in MWO or nearly any other FPS that isn't a respawnfest. Modern tactics largely revolve around concealment, maneuver, being able to apply more of your strength to a fight than the enemy can. There is almost nothing there that doesn't relate in some way to gaming.

Yes, you found the one flaw in Krivvan's argument. You're right, this game favors Napoleonic tactics. Sorry, Joseph.

Contemporary tactics largely revolve around combined arms engagements and squad level tactics. Neither of which are especially successful in MWO.

[terrycloth]

So do Napoleonic era tactics work best because the combat profile is close to Napoleonic weapons? Long-range fire is demoralizing but not instantly deadly, sensors mostly depend on line of sight, no equivalent to airplanes, etc.?

[norus]

If you run a generalist build, when you try to poke at long range to get some damage in you run into their long range specialists and you will take a LOT more than you gave. Same thing at medium, you're already hurt from messing with their long range now you're using your long and med range vs their med range, your short range hasn't come into play yet and you take more than you gave. Finally you reach short range and you're a cripple from fighting specialists who outperform you in their ranges and you can finally put all of your firepower to bear except if you have an lrm it's now useless (probably useless at the other 2 engagement ranges if opponents are competent) and your super long range weapon systems are quite heat/burntime inefficient to tangle with their short range 8 spl firestarters.

On that note taking a lrm or two isn't some amazing choice so that you don't have to take fire back at long ranges. It is not a weapon that allows you to carry if there are remotely competent enemies on the team. I seriously just listen to the LRM warnings after having poked the enemy at range and retreated, look up, step to a side, and smile at all the lrm's that crash into the ground next to me. Radar derp too stronk

[Koniks]

terrycloth, on 17 February 2015 - 01:30 PM, said:

So do Napoleonic era tactics work best because the combat profile is close to Napoleonic weapons? Long-range fire is demoralizing but not instantly deadly, sensors mostly depend on line of sight, no equivalent to airplanes, etc.?

Something like that.

[terrycloth]

To be fair, you should be comparing three generalist mechs to the three specialist mechs instead of making it 1 vs 3.

Then, your three 1/3rd long range firepower matches their 1 mech's long-range firepower, but you completely wipe him out since the other two are hiding while he has three mechs to spread damage across.

Then their one mid-range mech is alone against three mechs worth of 1/3rd mid and 1/3rd long, and get trashed.

Now up two mechs, you steamroll over the short range brawler.

... in reality it works like neither of those scenarios.

[Koniks]

terrycloth, on 17 February 2015 - 02:16 PM, said:

To be fair, you should be comparing three generalist mechs to the three specialist mechs instead of making it 1 vs 3.

Then, your three 1/3rd long range firepower matches their 1 mech's long-range firepower, but you completely wipe him out since the other two are hiding while he has three mechs to spread damage across.

Then their one mid-range mech is alone against three mechs worth of 1/3rd mid and 1/3rd long, and get trashed.

Now up two mechs, you steamroll over the short range brawler.

... in reality it works like neither of those scenarios.

You mean like this? http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__4203781

[Kristov Kerensky]

Dock Steward, on 17 February 2015 - 01:07 PM, said:

This is going to make me seem like I'm just trolling, I'm sure, but I really can't respond to this. You go off on this tangent regarding swarming and tactics and I just don't think that has much to do with frankenbuilds vs meta builds. This discussion belongs to everyone, so, of course, talk about what you like, but I'm talking about frankenbuilds vs meta builds and why meta builds are most often more effective. I could give point after point on my feelings, but, honestly, I don't think I need to. Look at what people run for builds. Are we not in agreement that most players run what we shall call "non-frankenbuilds?" Backup weapons are one thing, but look at how few "balanced builds" are being played. Now ask yourself why that is. Easier to pilot? Maybe, but if easier doesn't equate to more success (cbills, XP, wins) then being easy won't draw people. Why are people drawn to those builds?

Because they work, and they work better than the other options at the moment. You really think there's a win button in the form of frankenbuilds out there, and people aren't using it because...

First off, there is NO such thing as a metagame or metabuild in MWO. There isn't an overarching game first off, CW is just getting started up, still in alpha(as far as I'm concerned, they can call it beta all they want), and there's no such thing as THE perfect build for competition play, hasn't been in the past 3 years. There HAVE been Flavor of the Moment builds, which capitalize on certain imbalances in the game to be perceived as OP or actually ARE OP(Tbolt 9S as of yesterday anyone?), and none of those FotM builds are good for very long, anywhere from 2 weeks to a few months at most. Don't get too comfortable in what the top players in the top teams use. And who the hell ARE the top players in the top teams anyway? Would that be the team that won the last RHoD tourney or the ones who one the Stockers tourney? Is it the Clan taking the most planets in a CW? Or is it the House that's taking the most planets in CW? Or the Mercs working for the Clans or House? Seriously, how the hell does anyone make that call when we have no way to actually determine who's best?

FotM vs a Rounded build, toss up on who'll win based on skills of the pilots driving them. Both equally skilled, then it'll go to whoever is best able to take advantage of the other Mech's weaknesses, which tends to favor the Rounded build.

Toss an experienced vet in a FotM and a newbie in the same, that vet will win. Toss them both in Rounded, same results. It's the pilot's abilities, skills and tactical sense that make the winner, along with a bit of Luck, so don't put too much stock in the Flavor of the Month builds, especially since they rarely last more than a month or two in MWO.

Learn to pilot what YOU like, not what someone says is the BESTESTS OF THE BESTESTS, because that's only going to be good until the next hotfix or patch

[wanderer]

Why don't you see generalist builds?

Because even in TT, it's better to have specialists than generalists. A specialist can position themselves to optimize their full firepower, while a generalist always suffers some loss of firepower in doing so- and specialists can position themselves to cover each other's weak spots to boot.

Heck, in TT tournaments it was always fun watching people have the same idea as the OP- while I was at perfect range in my Archer,back a bit with my LRMs, my buddy in the Whitworth-S was up front for a perfect ML/SRM salvo. The opponent was sitting there popping off half the firepower from each of his 'Mechs, because no position let him use the maximum firepower he carried effectively. The same applies in MWO.

[Dock Steward]

Kristov Kerensky, on 17 February 2015 - 02:56 PM, said:

First off, there is NO such thing as a metagame or metabuild in MWO. There isn't an overarching game first off, CW is just getting started up, still in alpha(as far as I'm concerned, they can call it beta all they want), and there's no such thing as THE perfect build for competition play, hasn't been in the past 3 years. There HAVE been Flavor of the Moment builds, which capitalize on certain imbalances in the game to be perceived as OP or actually ARE OP(Tbolt 9S as of yesterday anyone?), and none of those FotM builds are good for very long, anywhere from 2 weeks to a few months at most. Don't get too comfortable in what the top players in the top teams use. And who the hell ARE the top players in the top teams anyway? Would that be the team that won the last RHoD tourney or the ones who one the Stockers tourney? Is it the Clan taking the most planets in a CW? Or is it the House that's taking the most planets in CW? Or the Mercs working for the Clans or House? Seriously, how the hell does anyone make that call when we have no way to actually determine who's best?

FotM vs a Rounded build, toss up on who'll win based on skills of the pilots driving them. Both equally skilled, then it'll go to whoever is best able to take advantage of the other Mech's weaknesses, which tends to favor the Rounded build.

Toss an experienced vet in a FotM and a newbie in the same, that vet will win. Toss them both in Rounded, same results. It's the pilot's abilities, skills and tactical sense that make the winner, along with a bit of Luck, so don't put too much stock in the Flavor of the Month builds, especially since they rarely last more than a month or two in MWO.

Learn to pilot what YOU like, not what someone says is the BESTESTS OF THE BESTESTS, because that's only going to be good until the next hotfix or patch

Just so I'm clear: we're now going to argue over whether I should be calling it "meta" or "FoTM?" We've resorted to an argument over semantics? And there's no way of knowing who the "good" teams are? And skill trumps an effective build so...frankenbuilds are more effective?

You don't seem to have addressed any of the statements I made in the post that you quoted, so I'm not sure how to proceed...

[Kristov Kerensky]

No Dock, just pointing out that some of the stuff tossed around here is being used incorrectly. I've laughed about the entire metagame/metabuild thing since they first starting tossing those terms around in the closed beta. Metagame was the term they used first, and there's no overarching storyline even now, so there can't BE a metagame. Metabuild is the same thing, there is no such critter, just a Flavor of the Moment build based on what's currently perceived to be OP or is OP based on changes to the game. Today is a great example, the Tbolt 9S just lost some of it's power that made it OP with the quirk changes. Posts were already up ranting about it, more have been done today. It's a repeat from the last time changes were made that altered how the game played in some aspects and the then Flavor of the Moment became obsolete. It's been that way for 3 years, certain Mechs become the favored of the 'top tier', whoever the hell they are, and suddenly it's 'meta this' and 'meta that' from the users and the haters both. If it didn't amuse me so much, it'd would probably really annoy me, but it's too funny to watch people who suck in a Mech rant and rave about 'meta' when they die, especially when I see they were USING the same Mech they are complaining about.

And I'm sorry, but when it comes down to it, player skill IS the overriding factor in who's going to win in a 1v1 FotM vs Franken. Both have their strengths, while the Franken usually has less weaknesses then the FotM, but not always. The Dragonslayer was a very balanced FotM for a while there, and that little Firestarter is STILL a nasty little bugger, but how many Dragonslayers have you seen in drops lately? There's a LOT of players who played in the last big RHoD tourney who paid real world cash to buy those 2 Hero Mechs because they were the FotM at the time, talk about some buyer's remorse when the game got changed and the Dragonslayer became just another dust collector.

Until this game is settled, HSR working properly, hitreg functioning properly, there won't be any balance, and it'll constantly be getting messed with because, for reasons beyond my understanding, someone at PGI thinks they can fix the problems by changing things all the time. Car won't always starts, doesn't always stay running, so change the tires and repaint it, replace all the upholstery, that'll fix it, right! Until this stuff is fixed and working, find a Mech you enjoy driving and you do well in and go with it. Ignore the FotM unless you want to play with it, which sometimes means real cash to purchase it, and play with what you enjoy. It's what I do, and I'm used to being extremely competative in online games, been in and run top teams in multiple games over the past 20 years. THIS game isn't ready for that level of play yet, so I'm not gonna get excited about the next FotM, that's something I'll pay attention to when everything else works right and SRM starts to actually play competatively. For now, we just play to have fun, bugger the rest of it, we're in MECHS again for the first time in a decade.

[Zerstorer Stallin]

So in case you didn't get the memo... MWO is all about front loading damage in a pin point location!

I know when I think battletech that is the first thing that come to mind!

[Dock Steward]

Kristov Kerensky, on 17 February 2015 - 04:08 PM, said:

No Dock, just pointing out that some of the stuff tossed around here is being used incorrectly. I've laughed about the entire metagame/metabuild thing since they first starting tossing those terms around in the closed beta. Metagame was the term they used first, and there's no overarching storyline even now, so there can't BE a metagame. Metabuild is the same thing, there is no such critter, just a Flavor of the Moment build based on what's currently perceived to be OP or is OP based on changes to the game. Today is a great example, the Tbolt 9S just lost some of it's power that made it OP with the quirk changes. Posts were already up ranting about it, more have been done today. It's a repeat from the last time changes were made that altered how the game played in some aspects and the then Flavor of the Moment became obsolete. It's been that way for 3 years, certain Mechs become the favored of the 'top tier', whoever the hell they are, and suddenly it's 'meta this' and 'meta that' from the users and the haters both. If it didn't amuse me so much, it'd would probably really annoy me, but it's too funny to watch people who suck in a Mech rant and rave about 'meta' when they die, especially when I see they were USING the same Mech they are complaining about.

And I'm sorry, but when it comes down to it, player skill IS the overriding factor in who's going to win in a 1v1 FotM vs Franken. Both have their strengths, while the Franken usually has less weaknesses then the FotM, but not always. The Dragonslayer was a very balanced FotM for a while there, and that little Firestarter is STILL a nasty little bugger, but how many Dragonslayers have you seen in drops lately? There's a LOT of players who played in the last big RHoD tourney who paid real world cash to buy those 2 Hero Mechs because they were the FotM at the time, talk about some buyer's remorse when the game got changed and the Dragonslayer became just another dust collector.

Until this game is settled, HSR working properly, hitreg functioning properly, there won't be any balance, and it'll constantly be getting messed with because, for reasons beyond my understanding, someone at PGI thinks they can fix the problems by changing things all the time. Car won't always starts, doesn't always stay running, so change the tires and repaint it, replace all the upholstery, that'll fix it, right! Until this stuff is fixed and working, find a Mech you enjoy driving and you do well in and go with it. Ignore the FotM unless you want to play with it, which sometimes means real cash to purchase it, and play with what you enjoy. It's what I do, and I'm used to being extremely competative in online games, been in and run top teams in multiple games over the past 20 years. THIS game isn't ready for that level of play yet, so I'm not gonna get excited about the next FotM, that's something I'll pay attention to when everything else works right and SRM starts to actually play competatively. For now, we just play to have fun, bugger the rest of it, we're in MECHS again for the first time in a decade.

Everything you just said is wonderful, and I agree with all of it.

But I'd personally still like to argue about "mixed-loadouts and allround supportive team loadouts" and how non-mixed builds show "that people only play as a [sic] individual," or rather, more importantly, why I don't agree with the previous statement at all.

[Kristov Kerensky]

We can continue that debate, although I'm not as inflexible about it, I think specialist builds are good for a team, as long as they don't make up too much of it. BTech is a combined arms war game, something we don't get to see really in MWO, but the basics of that carry over to the Mech side as well, hence all the different Mechs that do different jobs. Some are generalists, some are specialists, lets face it, FASA was boating long before any video game had a Mech in it

In PUGs, you will see lots of specialized builds that are purely self centered, those players want nothing but to increase their KDR. They'll cherry pick, get in your way when firing at that about to die Dire, you know the type, we all run into them doing PUGs, the guys who blow your back armor off because you are between them and the enemy, nevermind that YOU didn't move, the same guys who die fast and then tell everyone how bad they are, the team sucks, etc. Self centered little..yeah, those guys.

Organized units, you'll find them, but they've usually learned to put the team first so they play those specialized builds because they ARE good to have around. They won't always blow their teammates backs off, just occasionally

[Saint Scarlett Johan]

I found that even in TT, mixing different boat types worked better than multiple bracket build mechs. You know what makes a pair of AWS-8Qs scary? A pair of AWS-8Qs and a Demolisher.

Wanna get inside someone's head? Throw a random lance of SRM carriers in with your two lances of LRM carriers.

[Ultimax]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 February 2015 - 10:32 AM, said:

Then you don't understand real combat tactics.

I'm not sure I follow here Joe.

Are you saying that militaries don't build specialized vehicles?

That Bombers & Jet Fighters are both designed as generalists to cover a little bit of everything?

That Navies are full of ships that all do a little bit of everything, none of them are specialized to function in a role like carrying Jets or Bombarding a position?



All of military history is full of specialized units, with specialized equipment.



Sure, most of these examples probably have backup weapons/systems in their design - but if you look at the specialists being played, the streamlined builds, most of them can play at more than one range.


Having 3x ERLLAS on my Shadowhawk doesn't mean its suddenly useless inside 300m and should have brought back up weapons - it functions inside 300m, it's just no longer at optimal range and needs to avoid short ranged builds.


Dropping some heatsinks so I can squeeze in a single SRM 6 for "more short range punch" - just ends up making the build less effective at the role I designed it for and it's still not going to stand toe to toe with a specialized brawler.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 17 February 2015 - 10:35 PM.

[Sarlic]

Ultimatum X, on 17 February 2015 - 10:34 PM, said:

I'm not sure I follow here Joe.

Are you saying that militaries don't build specialized vehicles?

That Bombers & Jet Fighters are both designed as generalists to cover a little bit of everything?

That Navies are full of ships that all do a little bit of everything, none of them are specialized to function in a role like carrying Jets or Bombarding a position?



All of military history is full of specialized units, with specialized equipment.



Sure, most of these examples probably have backup weapons/systems in their design - but if you look at the specialists being played, the streamlined builds, most of them can play at more than one range.


Having 3x ERLLAS on my Shadowhawk doesn't mean its suddenly useless inside 300m and should have brought back up weapons - it functions inside 300m, it's just no longer at optimal range and needs to avoid short ranged builds.


Dropping some heatsinks so I can squeeze in a single SRM 6 for "more short range punch" - just ends up making the build less effective at the role I designed it for and it's still not going to stand toe to toe with a specialized brawler.

Thats no specialist. Throwing hardpoints away in order arhieve the high alpha.
As matter of fact, as a generalist i have rebuild the RS as a pure generalist build. It was a challenge to fill all hardpoints in. Scored in about 3 matches full solo que around 700 damage. Low on kills, but high in assists. I am there to cause damage, wrecked components, I have facewrecked specialists in the end, because they took the risk they were designed for and were too damaged to carry on.

Aside from my personal experience, you seem to forget that everyone up to now who calls them a specialist is playing for themselves, they just go with the other sheeps in order to vomit where they like. Get a few dogs to herd the sheep and the sheep is nothing.

In the competitive scene or group play, things are slighty more different, because they know each other.

Almost each of my Atlai is a generalist. A pretty succesfull formula based on my personal experience. Some others cannot play as a generalist, then so be it. Pick your style.

Sure i am not saying every match has the same outcome, that would be foolish. Because we both know how the game works. Skill is involved and so are many factors, but saying specialists that -most- of them can engage on range is just because the game meachniscs allow them to do so.

But i dont want too many stacked 'specialists' on my team, because i know we will be Nascar-ring online, thus nerfing your team with missing out the generalist. Which is more in common then you know.

We can discuss further about what it needs to archieve the win but the bottom fact is that people obviously, as i have said, do not want to play a more variety build and are dropping hps, weapons and more just to vomit with it.

Spoiler

Sarlic, on 17 February 2015 - 11:22 AM, said:

Are you not seeing the problem or am i having difficulties trying to explain?

I am trying to be clear, but what's the point of having for example ten specialists on your team and two generalists. You are nerfing your team with that many specialists. They have to wait each other off to get in range.

Obviously the specialists cannot respond in certain situations because they are specialists.

The generalist can -almost- respond to any situation without having to worry to get in range.

I-ask-to-have-more-variety-in-loadouts. Point. Specialists are not obseleted, but that many stacked together is not even helping.

Because that's what currently is going on and that's currently the problem i am discussing. Why do you think alot of these so called specialists are carrying arty and air? For obvious reasons.

Edited by Sarlic, 18 February 2015 - 12:43 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ultimatum X, on 17 February 2015 - 10:34 PM, said:

I'm not sure I follow here Joe.

Are you saying that militaries don't build specialized vehicles?

That Bombers & Jet Fighters are both designed as generalists to cover a little bit of everything?

That Navies are full of ships that all do a little bit of everything, none of them are specialized to function in a role like carrying Jets or Bombarding a position?



All of military history is full of specialized units, with specialized equipment.



Sure, most of these examples probably have backup weapons/systems in their design - but if you look at the specialists being played, the streamlined builds, most of them can play at more than one range.


Having 3x ERLLAS on my Shadowhawk doesn't mean its suddenly useless inside 300m and should have brought back up weapons - it functions inside 300m, it's just no longer at optimal range and needs to avoid short ranged builds.


Dropping some heatsinks so I can squeeze in a single SRM 6 for "more short range punch" - just ends up making the build less effective at the role I designed it for and it's still not going to stand toe to toe with a specialized brawler.

Are we flying?(Missiles Autocannons and/or Machine guns)
Are we sailing? (Cannons and missiles)

Ground forces do have some "special" units.

But a Infantry battalion was 3 rifle Companies, One Weapons company, a support company Maybe some arty... We never dealt directly with arty during my tour.
A fire team was the smallest "formation" in the Corps
2 riflemen(M-16) (Sustained fire)
a Grenadier(M16 with a grenade launcher) (Sustained fire and breaching)
a SAWman.(hosing the area)

Three of these teams per squad and 3 squads per platoon. 3 Platoons per Company Plus a weapons platoon.

3 ER large lasers are good at all ranges but do not give you indirect fire ability, which would allow you the ability to assist a team mate in trouble 600 m way behind 3 ridge lines.

Using double sinks and a bit more ammo The RS is a solid all ranges Mech! I'd do pretty good in that baby!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 18 February 2015 - 03:40 AM.

[Sarlic]

Today i noticed more wubbee specialists. Surprised? Not really. More like expected.

[Koniks]

Joseph Mallan, on 18 February 2015 - 03:32 AM, said:

Are we flying?(Missiles Autocannons and/or Machine guns)
Are we sailing? (Cannons and missiles)

Ground forces do have some "special" units.

But a Infantry battalion was 3 rifle Companies, One Weapons company, a support company Maybe some arty... We never dealt directly with arty during my tour.
A fire team was the smallest "formation" in the Corps
2 riflemen(M-16) (Sustained fire)
a Grenadier(M16 with a grenade launcher) (Sustained fire and breaching)
a SAWman.(hosing the area)

Three of these teams per squad and 3 squads per platoon. 3 Platoons per Company Plus a weapons platoon.

3 ER large lasers are good at all ranges but do not give you indirect fire ability, which would allow you the ability to assist a team mate in trouble 600 m way behind 3 ridge lines.

Using double sinks and a bit more ammo The RS is a solid all ranges Mech! I'd do pretty good in that baby!

You'll note that they didn't just equip every soldier with a rifle, a SAW, an M16 grenade launcher, a mortar, and a .50 cal sniper rifle. Or a Zorg weapon that does all of that.

Edited by Mizeur, 18 February 2015 - 08:16 AM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Military forces do indeed have specialized vehicles Ultimatum X, but they have far more multi-role vehicles because specialized vehicles tend to be 1 trick ponies. Battleships, Destroyers, Carries, all specialized right? Only, each and every one of them is actually a multi-role platform with multiple weapon systems and defense systems capable of dealing with air, sea or land targets. Even the newest US Navy ships are multi-role platforms, and let us not forget the JSF 35, Joint Strike Fighter, intended to replace a slew of aircraft in a single package, bombers, fighters and ground support.

Now, does that mean that multi-role is the best bet? Depends, I present you the A10 Thunderbolt, aka the Warthog, close ground support aircraft. She's ugly, not good for much besides blowing tanks away and dropping bombs for CAS(close air support). That big GAU-8 Avenger gun the entire aircraft is literally designed around is very precise and very devastating, and lets not forget it's variable bomb/missile payload ability. Downside is, if there's any enemy aircraft in the area, that Warthog is easy meat, little ability to dogfight, not fast and not real agile. It's a specialized vehicle with a singular purpose and it has almost no functionality outside of that singular purpose either. The JSF 35 can do CAS, and it's not a sitting duck when enemy aircraft show up, not to mention it has much better anti-AA capability, something the A10 is sadly lacking. Currently, the A10 fleet is in stasis, the Air Force wants to retire them all, the National Guard and US Army are both interesting in taking them all, but Congress won't let the Air Force do anything with them in that regards. The F35 and other multi-role aircraft are already doing 80% of all CAS operations, they do it better thanks to more modern munitions, avionics and training of ground troops who call for the CAS.

So, multi-role vehicles ARE the way modern militaries tend to go, much more bang for your buck and less weaknesses to have to overcome. Some specialized vehicles are still in use, but if you look at the drawing boards for upcoming vehicles, not so specialized, far more multi-role designs. It's the better option.