21 replies to this topic

[Carnivoris]

I get it. The MM has to know what mech you're in to place you in the right group (right... right? that's their story, anyway). OK, whatever. How about just letting us change the loadout pre-match instead of choosing another mech? I know this would lead to longer wait times to actually get IN a match, but a lot of us have been wanting to save loadouts for a long time, anyway. I know I've got a couple mechs that I juggle equipment on depending on my mood. Why not let us do that depending on the map?

It's especially needed now that we have the long-range dependent Alpine with more of its ilk to come. By no means am I complaining about Alpine. I love that map. I just wish I could be more prepared for battle going in.

[Endbringer]

Carnivoris, on 01 March 2013 - 12:59 PM, said:

I get it. The MM has to know what mech you're in to place you in the right group (right... right? that's their story, anyway). OK, whatever. How about just letting us change the loadout pre-match instead of choosing another mech? I know this would lead to longer wait times to actually get IN a match, but a lot of us have been wanting to save loadouts for a long time, anyway. I know I've got a couple mechs that I juggle equipment on depending on my mood. Why not let us do that depending on the map?

It's especially needed now that we have the long-range dependent Alpine with more of its ilk to come. By no means am I complaining about Alpine. I love that map. I just wish I could be more prepared for battle going in.

I agree completely. I would pay money for extra loadouts. A lot of F2P's charge for such things. Of course...free is nice too.

Edited by Endbringer, 01 March 2013 - 01:08 PM.

[Tikkamasala]

How about bringing either a mobile mech (and) or a balanced loadout?

[beniliusbob]

The great thing about the way matchmaking works and how it interacts with the genesis of Alpine Peaks is that it forces people to run balanced builds instead of doing this min-maxing crap of which you are fans. Or else, risk being in a less than totally effective mech (which, sometimes, is perfectly fine also, and adds to the fun).

Change nothing, please.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I don't want people saying "Hey, I'm on a small map, lets all bring our splat cats" or "Hey, I'm on a huge map, lets bring my PPC stalker".

It will make the game exceptionally boring.

The random maps, and random map sizes will lead towards people have to make decisions on whether they want to be amazing at long range or short range or whether versatility is worth it to them.

Instead of a lot of cookie-cutterness.

[Tabrias07]

they've already said that CW will include a lobby that allows you to see what map you're dropping on and choose your mech accordingly. you will not be able to drop on a specific map though.

[Indk]

I got an idea why don't people L2P and build mechs that aren't gimmicky?

[Tice Daurus]

beniliusbob, on 01 March 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

The great thing about the way matchmaking works and how it interacts with the genesis of Alpine Peaks is that it forces people to run balanced builds instead of doing this min-maxing crap of which you are fans. Or else, risk being in a less than totally effective mech (which, sometimes, is perfectly fine also, and adds to the fun).

Change nothing, please.

I have to agree with this. People need to build balanced mechs for build outs when it comes to matches like these. And it's the luck of the draw when we are doing matches like this with maps you have no idea of running on. But you guys have to remember...it's NOT going to be like this forever. When CW hits, you will know or have an idea of what you will be attacking. When you are given say a contract to say run a raid or assault a world, you'll be given a loadout on what world it will be, like a frozen planet, an arboreal planet, a hot/desert planet, an asteroid, or whatever, and you will know this info AHEAD of time with the information warfare given to you.

When doing random matches like we're doing now, it should be up for grabs.

It's beta.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I still hope that with CW we have enough varied types of maps, that while you have general ideas, you aren't sure whether it will be a bigger or smaller map. Like if they say "A frozen, snow covered area" it could be Alpine or Frozen City.

I'm really begining to think this Omni-Mech style mechlab where everything is possible is bad for the game in the long run.

Might as well just have a short range, a medium range and a long range weapon and let people boat whichever version they want at this rate.

[Endbringer]

Those are good points. Especially the one about learning how to play...I should do that. I feel ashamed. WHAT HAVE I BEEN DOING ALL THIS TIME? A fly marrying a bumblebee?

I would still like loadouts in the mechlab. I am lazy like that.

[Mechwarrior5138008]

I think when the game has it's terrain control feature set up, you will know what map you are getting before you drop, so you can plan accordingly. Right now, this is just beta, so they are working on weapon balance and other little glitches. The current game play IS NOT the final game play.

[SirLANsalot]

beniliusbob, on 01 March 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

The great thing about the way matchmaking works and how it interacts with the genesis of Alpine Peaks is that it forces people to run balanced builds instead of doing this min-maxing crap of which you are fans. Or else, risk being in a less than totally effective mech (which, sometimes, is perfectly fine also, and adds to the fun).

Change nothing, please.

when alpine shows up, most people just disconnect rather then play it because of there mech or they hate the "its not a brawler map" idea. Thing is, all the maps will eventually be made to the size of alpine, even city maps which generally are made to be close combat. The big citys (at least they felt bigger then what we have for river city) of MW4 were perfect, they still had areas for range, like a park, but also you has pure close combat when fighting around a building. So were the days of chasing a mech around and around a building like a merry-go-round.

[Mechwarrior5138008]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 01 March 2013 - 01:19 PM, said:

I still hope that with CW we have enough varied types of maps, that while you have general ideas, you aren't sure whether it will be a bigger or smaller map. Like if they say "A frozen, snow covered area" it could be Alpine or Frozen City.

I'm really begining to think this Omni-Mech style mechlab where everything is possible is bad for the game in the long run.

Might as well just have a short range, a medium range and a long range weapon and let people boat whichever version they want at this rate.

there will be more maps. boats have lots of issues. exploit them. i like when i see a boat, because they are the easiest kills. the current system is definitely NOT 'anything goes. the hard point system is working beautifully. yes some ding dongs boat, because they only know how to use one weapon. the whole point is to let each of us make some tweeks to personallize our mechs. without this, there would be about 7 people playing instead of 10s of thousands.

[Merc85]

beniliusbob, on 01 March 2013 - 01:09 PM, said:

The great thing about the way matchmaking works and how it interacts with the genesis of Alpine Peaks is that it forces people to run balanced builds instead of doing this min-maxing crap of which you are fans. Or else, risk being in a less than totally effective mech (which, sometimes, is perfectly fine also, and adds to the fun).

Change nothing, please.

Well said!!!!!!

Edited by Merc85, 01 March 2013 - 01:41 PM.

[Lukoi Banacek]

I honestly think that the Devs are looking at much bigger picture than we the players are. We're focused on winning matches etc....they're concerned with testing massive numbers, combinations etc and introducing CW.

Given that we don't know yet what CW will truly incorporate, perhaps there's a "solution" on the horizon that will allow for giving us more upfront information that won't necessarily remove the balancing impact that this one random map seems to have on so many people's loadout decisions.

I'd rather test the mechanics and wait and see what CW has in store for us, than for the Devs to spend time on modifying the matchmaker/interface IF said modifications are nullified by CW.

[BLUPRNT]

Before Alpine arrived we had a good chance at knowing what type of game we are going to play, a short range slug fest. However in my experience in trying to coordinate in a team style the wait times for everybody to hit the ready button can be lengthy and is why I don't run in the 8 man matches. The more players involved the longer it takes. I could not imagine what may come if we tried this in solo que.

I say leave it as is and be better prepaired for what lies ahead.

I had a C1 Cat built for short range fights until Alpine arrived, at which time I adjusted it slighty to extend its engagement range. I do equally well with it on all maps. Runs a little hotter than it used to so I have had to adapt a little.

I have had to rethink a number of my mechs as well. And I have no issues with this.

I'm still reworking the Stalkers as I have all of them each in a unique build. I now wonder if only 3 are needed if I have to build a more balanced loadout.

[buttmonkey]

i used to want this until i realised it actually encourages people to build balanced mechs.

now camo paterns on the hand should definately be able to be saved for different maps.

[Monky]

Meh. Non issue. Fixable on players end by not being stupid and loading weapons that are only effective in one range bracket. If you want to focus on close combat, mount at least one long range weapon so you're not screwed when the time comes. Even on a splatcat a single lrm 5 and a ton of ammo is worth its weight in gold while you're closing in or once you're wounded. In reverse, a PPC stalker can benefit immensely from throwing on some light SRM launchers or streaks. If you leave a weakspot, smart players will exploit it. I love nothing more than closing to 30 meters on PPC or LRM boats, or hanging at 500 meters against splatcats.

Edited by Monky, 01 March 2013 - 02:05 PM.

[ShadowDarter]

you build it, then its your responsibility.

Build a more balanced machine and you will do fine.

[Shepherd]

In my opinion, having to lock in your mech and THEN get randomly placed into any of the maps is a great incentive to build smart mechs. I do not want to see that changed in any way.

We've got a few maps already:
River City A and B
Frozen City A and B
Forest Colony
Caustic Valley
Alpine

7 maps (or 5 depending on how you look at it). A variety of temperatures and terrain. Some favor high heat mechs and some punish them. Some favor close or long range mechs, and some punish them. The way it is now, there is an incentive to build with all of those maps in mind.

You'll see more balanced loadouts when players get sick of losing on certain maps because their mechs are only good on a few of the maps.