102 replies to this topic

[InspectorG]

Nightingale27, on 02 August 2015 - 06:25 PM, said:

Tell me which part of this:


limits the descriptions to "the average Pugger".
You just pretty much insulted EVERYONE in the pug queue, good or not. If that isn't called generalization, I don't know what is (and do please look up "Faulty Generalization").

Also, Meta builds are not the only viable builds and neither are they necessarily the most efficient build on whatever variant we are talking about. Apparently, a lot of people think that meta builds are the only effective builds. They are wrong.
Seriously, if they think that only meta builds will work and experimentation isn't possible, where do they suppose meta builds come from?

EDIT: wait...

Well... you could fix that infuriating comment...

"Insulting" the average Pugger? No, just stating an observation that many aside from myself also claim.

Do tell me what is a good metric for defining 'averagely-skilled' play and we can try to compare it to a metric for 'highly skilled play' in Solo.

Would you say 500 damage and 6 assists. Kills being somewhat random due to killstealing or combined fire with teammates?
Is that a good metric? Perhaps 300+ damage for certain lights/mediums?

Go find observations of 'average Pug play' by people other than me.
What are the common complaints?
List them, go ahead and survey them. Tell me what you find.

Why the culture of "ELO-Hell" and "Carry Harder"???

And what do the decent comp players say about average solo play?
Their observations?

See, MWO has a steep learning curve. MWO doesnt explicitly state HOW its different from other FPS. MWO is a team game despite what the average player thinks. Most think its like CoD- run and shoot something, get a kill before you die.
You think they view it as a team game? They why all they hypothetical 1 vs 1 scenarios involving "light vs Assault" or 'tanking', or any of many other examples of average players thinking they know the game when they really dont(to their defense PGI really doesnt break it down for them).


As far as meta builds?
I dont think YOU understand the basis for Meta builds.

In Solo play with the random maps and objectives, generalist builds will generally be more advantageous than specialized builds.
I know you dont like generalizations but we have to speak about laws of averages here.
Unless you want to track the matches of each player and parse the info.

Is the average-low-skill pilot gonna do better in a Meta lazer-vomit Timby? Or a 6 flamer hunchback?

Now there will be 1-2 pilots out there who can make the 6 flamer hunchback work. But is that because of the build? Or a mix of skill and playstyle?

Do explain the non-meta builds you speak of and how they work in the average-low-skill pugger's hands.
And these non-meta builds, how many high level players use them in high level competition?
Why?


See the main meta builds that are used were discovered by the more competitive players who pushed efficiency to near limit.
Experimented with which builds work for whichever map with whichever team composition for the objective.

They are not the "only" builds, they are the most "efficient" builds and if you understood that you would understand their advantage.
Your argument about experimentation is silly. Of course people experimented, but higher competition play found the better builds faster by pushing the envelope...and even by looking at the game's code.
High skill vs high skill, the less efficient build is gonna be at a more noticeable disadvantage. Average vs average, the build difference will be less pronounced. Why? Because average skill cant maximally use the build to its full potential.

You end up with XLengine Stalkers who dont twist damage...then the player complains the 'Stalker' wasnt as powerful as advertised.

As far as 'insulting the player base', get off your high horse.

I am a DECENT Solo player in a Light or Assault.
I am AVERAGE in a heavy or most mediums...YES, MY DEFINITION of average.

I am Totally AVERAGE in group drop because i rarely do it.

So am i insulting myself?

Or am i observing a skill deficiency that i can improve upon so that i can 'git good'?

[InspectorG]

Nightingale27, on 02 August 2015 - 06:44 PM, said:

How did you get that out of this:

beleneagle didnt supply the context to his/her statement.

I was assuming he/she was complaining about lone assaults getting swarmed by 2-4 lights(wolf packing).

[TheCharlatan]

WM Quicksilver, on 02 August 2015 - 03:19 PM, said:

Dire Wolves aren't significantly agile, and they are the best long range assaults in the game. Agility isn't what deters lights/mediums, it is firepower.


I don't propose this to solve tracking lights/mediums, I propose this to help the inter-class balance, where the heaviest of the weight class tend to be the top mechs of the weight class because they have a number of advantages without any disadvantage due to agility being tied to only speed.


Agility again isn't what makes brawling viable, because most non-brawlers are fast as well. The best brawling Heavy/Medium happen to go the same speed (and thus the same agility) as the best mid to long range Heavy/Medium because they are the same mechs. It is the ability to get within range without being focused immediately that allows brawling to be more viable in non-comp play which agility isn't a significant factor in.

I don't know what you think, but i feel this conversation would be a lot easier if we were face to face and each with a beer

I'm still unconvinced that "decoupling" would play out as you describe, but neither of us can know for sure, so the best thing would be to have the chance to test it out, which i'd be happy to do.