Jump to content

Tired Of Cheese. Canon, Please.


60 replies to this topic

#1 MrKnox

    Member

  • Veteran Founder
  • 19 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:03 PM

Every game I've been in since the new patch, the only mechs I feel I'm facing are:

Lag Jenners (all variants successful)
Cataphracts with god knows how many UAC5's or AC5's.
Streakapaults, again.
Gaussapaults, again.
Barely seeing anything but this.

My stock build Cataphract (the one with the XL engine) just gets violated like its a stationary light.

With all the QQ aside, PGI, could we please get a "canon option" in the future? I would love to join battle with stock builds...

Hey, its why "stock car racing" is so popular, right? Because all those cars have a very similar base to build on..?

#2 Desrtfox

    Member

  • Veteran Founder
  • 678 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, Arizona, USA

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:05 PM

This isn't NASCAR. Adapt or Die. having said that, a canon option would be fun, but PGI has waay too much on their plate to worry about that now.

#3 tvih

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 246 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:09 PM

Well, basically the problem is that customization provides longevity for the game. And probably even more importantly some stock variants are vastly better than others, so you'd still see mostly the few best builds.

#4 Dakkath

    Com Guard

  • Legendary Moderator
  • 1,980 posts
  • LocationG-14 Classified

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:12 PM

View PostMrKnox, on 21 November 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

Every game I've been in since the new patch, the only mechs I feel I'm facing are:

Lag Jenners (all variants successful)
Cataphracts with god knows how many UAC5's or AC5's.
Streakapaults, again.
Gaussapaults, again.
Barely seeing anything but this.

My stock build Cataphract (the one with the XL engine) just gets violated like its a stationary light.

With all the QQ aside, PGI, could we please get a "canon option" in the future? I would love to join battle with stock builds...

Hey, its why "stock car racing" is so popular, right? Because all those cars have a very similar base to build on..?


IMO, I think that once the netcode is fixed up good, the light mechs wont be near as much of a thorn in your side.

Cataphract AC builds aren't that bad except for the screen shake that basically 'stun locks' a pilot. They could tweak that to only occur on lower tonnage mechs, etc.

Streak and Gauss boats, meh. --- Stay out of their range, or focus fire them right off the bat.


And yes, I would love to see a stock-mech only option, but because I am more of a BT purist. :(

#5 siLve00

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 667 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:13 PM

i consider you go and play minesweeper... but dont complain if you hit the bomb with the 1st try !

#6 MrKnox

    Member

  • Veteran Founder
  • 19 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:16 PM

View PostDesrtfox, on 21 November 2012 - 04:05 PM, said:

This isn't NASCAR. Adapt or Die. having said that, a canon option would be fun, but PGI has waay too much on their plate to worry about that now.


Yeah, but adapt or die is boring when I'm forced to use a small subset of builds. Same goes with mechs like the Raven... I wish they'd keep specialisation so there's reason to use more mechs and more varied builds.

And this also speaks to another poster above, longevity will only come if the customisation allows for people to make effective and varied builds. Not, "build x or y will **** you".

#7 Fajther

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • 426 posts
  • LocationGrand Rapids, Michigan, usa

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:17 PM

Time to start playing the metagame.

#8 Squid von Torgar

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 816 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:18 PM

I agree with the OP to a point.

Given the crazy builds we like to come up with (I am one of them) it does feel less like Battletech and more like flavour of the month (depending on what gets nerfed/buffed this patch)

The thing is though that stock builds just dont work given the increased ROF and double armour. Not to mention the heat system.

However I too would play a "Cannon only" mode, and I would enjoy it. I accept there are far more pressing priorities, but in the future why not?

#9 siLve00

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 667 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:18 PM

View PostMrKnox, on 21 November 2012 - 04:16 PM, said:


Yeah, but adapt or die is boring when I'm forced to use a small subset of builds. Same goes with mechs like the Raven... I wish they'd keep specialisation so there's reason to use more mechs and more varied builds.

And this also speaks to another poster above, longevity will only come if the customisation allows for people to make effective and varied builds. Not, "build x or y will **** you".


theres a simple rule : adapt your tactics and gameplay
because you dont want to learn how to be better .. you ask PGI to fix it for you.. after they fixed that problem and you getting "owned " ( i dont like that word ) by the same stock build as your mech.. your coming here and want a gamemode where just ppl with the same skill and same mechs can play ?

serious.. sometimes you just need to learn how to play.. and thats an advice and not a flame.

#10 Solis Obscuri

    Don't Care How I Want It Now!

  • Legendary Founder
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • 4,523 posts
  • LocationPomme de Terre

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:19 PM

View PostDakkath, on 21 November 2012 - 04:12 PM, said:

And yes, I would love to see a stock-mech only option, but because I am more of a BT purist. :(

Likewise.

But I don't think the customization system we have is too bad, it at least tries to preserve some flavor of the original chassis/variant. I don't love the focus on mechlabwarrior, but I've really encountered no builds I couldn't beat, even using the stock variants without any modifications.

#11 Vermaxx

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 2,934 posts
  • LocationBuenos Aires

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:20 PM

"Stock car racing" is dead. NASCAR is a sport with very specific rules on how the cars are built (all custom) and tuned.

Kind of like the mechlab system of hardpoints and weight limitations. You can show up with any applicable chassis (we have more than NASCAR), and nearly any combination of engine/armor/armaments - with specific limits on WHAT kind of armaments we can load.

CANON is a bad word to use, because basically everything in MWO's mechlab could be done in "CANON" tabletop mech construction. A better word to use would have been 'original variants.'

#12 Wispsy

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 2,004 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:22 PM

Caraphract is a new mech, and has 4 ballistic slots. It is hardly surprising many people want to play around with it! You would have seen the same with the Cicada if that mech was useful in any form outside on denying the other team a light.
Streaks have been buffed, why would people not want to test what has changed...
Jenners are the best lights by far, why would you not want to see light mechs be successful? :(
Seen more cats with ac20s then Gauss myself.

Canon mode stock mech choices would be very limited.....you would probably only see 2/3 used for ever, no changes so no change :/

#13 Mechwarrior Buddah

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 8,054 posts
  • LocationUSA

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:22 PM

View PostMrKnox, on 21 November 2012 - 04:03 PM, said:

Every game I've been in since the new patch, the only mechs I feel I'm facing are:

Lag Jenners (all variants successful)
Cataphracts with god knows how many UAC5's or AC5's.
Streakapaults, again.
Gaussapaults, again.
Barely seeing anything but this.

My stock build Cataphract (the one with the XL engine) just gets violated like its a stationary light.

With all the QQ aside, PGI, could we please get a "canon option" in the future? I would love to join battle with stock builds...

Hey, its why "stock car racing" is so popular, right? Because all those cars have a very similar base to build on..?


this aint TT cannon schmannon as theyve SHOWED with the "double" heat sinks. Cant wait to see what the clanners bring.

Edited by Mechwarrior Buddah, 21 November 2012 - 04:23 PM.


#14 Squid von Torgar

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 816 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:23 PM

Quote

theres a simple rule : adapt your tactics and gameplay[/color]
because you dont want to learn how to be better .. you ask PGI to fix it for you.. after they fixed that problem and you getting "owned " ( i dont like that word ) by the same stock build as your mech.. your coming here and want a gamemode where just ppl with the same skill and same mechs can play ?

serious.. sometimes you just need to learn how to play.. and thats an advice and not a flame


Sorry dude, but you need a slap in the face with a AC20. It has nothing to do with L2P, and I would gladly take you on in a mech of your choice and show you that (Only we cant because PGI is working on 3rd person).

Its about capturing the flavour and feel of the mech battles we read about in the books. Its more about tactics and individual skill rather than min/max builds that wouldnt work in the cannon universe.

I hope the meta game introduces stuff like supply, where if you field a streak cat you run the chance of not getting resuppiled with ammo for a week. That would be a great leveler.

In the meantime, I look forward to the time the MM pitches us against each other.

#15 Desrtfox

    Member

  • Veteran Founder
  • 678 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, Arizona, USA

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:23 PM

View PostMrKnox, on 21 November 2012 - 04:16 PM, said:


Yeah, but adapt or die is boring when I'm forced to use a small subset of builds. Same goes with mechs like the Raven... I wish they'd keep specialisation so there's reason to use more mechs and more varied builds.

And this also speaks to another poster above, longevity will only come if the customisation allows for people to make effective and varied builds. Not, "build x or y will **** you".


Except, you do realize, that you are advocating a game mode that purposely restricts players to a small subset of builds?

I'm not saying that a canon mode wouldn't be fun, but let's not pretend it's going to lead to diversity. There will still be flavors of the month, etc. We'll just have a different - and noncustomizable - set of them.

Edited by Desrtfox, 21 November 2012 - 04:25 PM.


#16 Kyrie

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • Phoenix Overlord
  • 870 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:24 PM

The perils of the mechlab on actual game play balance have long been discussed since the beginning of beta. Hardpoints were meant to preserve some sense of viability for different weapon system types and mech loadouts, but given current conditions people always gravitate to the most effective solution.

Lag shields? Streaks.
Working hit detection, registration, etc? Lasers.

And so on,

#17 Karyudo ds

    Member

  • Elite Founder
  • 1,698 posts
  • LocationChaos March

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:26 PM

View PostVermaxx, on 21 November 2012 - 04:20 PM, said:

CANON is a bad word to use, because basically everything in MWO's mechlab could be done in "CANON" tabletop mech construction. A better word to use would have been 'original variants.'


Technically, but the construction rules aren't there to turn K2's in Gauss puking machines, it's to make your own Gauss puking machines. Though I think the modification rules on the other hand worked similar to the mechlab.

Either way I think a Stockmech option would be very interesting. Seems like it would be harder to enforce at the owned mech level unless they added a "revert to stock" button. Which wouldn't be to hard to do I guess. Though it seems like it would be easier if they made the trial mech roster bigger and had a trial only option maybe.

#18 Desrtfox

    Member

  • Veteran Founder
  • 678 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, Arizona, USA

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:32 PM

View PostKaryudo ds, on 21 November 2012 - 04:26 PM, said:


Technically, but the construction rules aren't there to turn K2's in Gauss puking machines, it's to make your own Gauss puking machines. Though I think the modification rules on the other hand worked similar to the mechlab.




Good point, but I think by virtue of the fact that we can rename the mechs in the mechlab indicates that we are creating our own mechs. The only reason they look like a k2, etc. is due to engine/art limitations.

#19 Squid von Torgar

    Member

  • Legendary Founder
  • 816 posts

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:37 PM

The thing is to come up with a total redesign in BT is prohibitively expensive. Entire nations struggle to do so, yet we as individuals can do so with impunity.

The costs for radically modifying a mech away from stock should be crazy.

In cannon there were many custom mechs, but they were the exception rather than the rule. In MWO its the reverse.

I am all for player freedom and giving the choice to the player, but we should do so within constraints. The HP system is too flexible IMHO and allows players too much freedom to try to exploit the system.

#20 Desrtfox

    Member

  • Veteran Founder
  • 678 posts
  • LocationPhoenix, Arizona, USA

Posted 21 November 2012 - 04:41 PM

View PostSquid von Torgar, on 21 November 2012 - 04:37 PM, said:

The thing is to come up with a total redesign in BT is prohibitively expensive. Entire nations struggle to do so, yet we as individuals can do so with impunity.

The costs for radically modifying a mech away from stock should be crazy.

In cannon there were many custom mechs, but they were the exception rather than the rule. In MWO its the reverse.

I am all for player freedom and giving the choice to the player, but we should do so within constraints. The HP system is too flexible IMHO and allows players too much freedom to try to exploit the system.


Fist off it's canon, not cannon. Secondly, I see your point, but let's remember the TT game is canon, and (really) so are the previous MW titles to most people. The original game and all previous games have allowed, in most cases, even greater freedom of customization than MWO. So, to me, the current system seems like a pretty good compromise.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users