78 replies to this topic

[Shootanoob]

Of course, the Cicada is also a great scout, perfectly suited for sniping hit-n-run action. The great thing with those scouts is, that they more or less are all able to put their respective counterparts down - of course, a Jenner is more the defensive scout blocker compared to the more active search-/support scouter Raven.

Kobold, on 07 June 2012 - 08:40 AM, said:

The more I hear about WoT, the more I am glad I've never played it.

do not belive everything you hear, WoT is a fun game to play, but it has a significant downside - it lacks Mechs.

Edited by BigPuma, 07 June 2012 - 08:43 AM.

[Kobold]

I mean that's just it though. I have tons of experience in MW3 and MW4. They had their flaws, but hopefully those will be addressed by the devs (who I'm sure have played the heck out of those games). It still baffles me that people keep using WoT for the gameplay comparison.


I feel like sometimes this forum is less a MWO online forum and more of a WoT group therapy session

[Shootanoob]

Be assured, your impression is shared ;-)

Only thing is, that I do not understand what's the point people want to be cured off. Sure, WoT has its flaws, but then again which game doesn't?

[Reported for Inappropriate Name]

having no "tech trees" and having the same weapons for everything is a good thing. a very very good thing

[Madrix]

As evidenced daily in hundreds of matches in WoT, most people don't know what scouting really is. I'm quite effective in a Leopard in actually keeping enemies illuminated for my team. This does NOT involve presenting myself to the enemy formation in the first 10 seconds of the match.

The same will likely hold true here in this game:
* People who make themselves the only target that the enemy team can see will (rightly) die quickly.
* Stealth > Knowing the Terrain > Discipline/Patience.

[Snotling]

WalkingDeathBot, on 30 May 2012 - 01:08 AM, said:

However, more guns = more kills = more xp/money.

I would love the devs to implement some factor to correct this. If you severely damage or even destroy a mech way heavier than your own, you should get a bonus.

Edited by Snotling, 07 June 2012 - 08:57 AM.

[pvtbryan]

CheeseThief, on 30 May 2012 - 01:11 AM, said:

If they do their idiots.

lol - *If they do, they're idiots.

I believe "sui-scouts" will likely be just as common here as they are in WoT. There are precious few (referencing WoT) that still purposefully practice it as a tactic, the spotting bonus is now basically negligible, but there are probably even more who drive scout tanks that die on accident - every - time. The thing to remember, is that there are droves and droves of terrible players - and some drive scouts. Though I believe this is endemic to online gaming - it seems to be even more so with free-to-play style titles.

A free-to-play pub match is still a free-to-play pub match. There will be sui-scouts. There will be afk Atlas'. There will be a Jenner on your team that shoots you in the back after running into you seven times. Entire flanks will go undefended. Regardless of the money given to the lawyers to draft up the TOS/EULA... there will still be three year olds piloting Hunchbacks.

[Shootanoob]

pvtbryan, on 07 June 2012 - 08:58 AM, said:

A free-to-play pub match is still a free-to-play pub match. There will be sui-scouts. There will be afk Atlas'. There will be a Jenner on your team that shoots you in the back after running into you seven times. Entire flanks will go undefended. Regardless of the money given to the lawyers to draft up the TOS/EULA... there will still be three year olds piloting Hunchbacks.

never, say again, NEVER I heared anything more true about human nature in regards of PvP

[Kobold]

I pray that there is a robust matchmaking system that takes into account the skill level (as measured by KDR or average XP gain in matches, or whatever). At least that way if I have a epileptic Catapult on my team, I can be confident the other side has a blind Stalker.

[Deathz Jester]

I think Lighter mechs will have a less forgiving, "I messed up" factor. meaning if you got too close to an enemy heavy/assault and he decides he wants an easier kill, then you're going to have to either run before he pummels most of your armor off or somehow kill him.

[Reported for Inappropriate Name]

voip for random games is a must. but at the same time so is an easily accessable mute function

I also hope - after playing wot for years, that there isn't a matchmaking system. but if there is it better be able to take individual skill into account so it doesn't create skill vacuum between the teams

Edited by Battlecruiser, 07 June 2012 - 09:18 AM.

[Kobold]

Battlecruiser, on 07 June 2012 - 09:16 AM, said:

voip for random games is a must. but at the same time so is an easily accessable mute function

I also hope - after playing wot for years, that there isn't a matchmaking system. but if there is it better be able to take individual skill into account so it doesn't create skill vacuum between the teams

Voice: I agree, I think it is necessary and standard these days. If it isn't already in the process of being implemented, I have to imagine that it is on the eternal "nice to have, but not a top priority" list.

Matchmaking: With as many pickup players as there are, there absolutely needs to be some way of keeping games balanced. Personally I'd like to see a limit on organized party sizes. One thing that always bothered me playing any version of Call of Duty on XBox Live is when a full team of 6 people from the same clan would show up and put a beating on the six random pub players that were assigned to fight them. It would be nice to see if there was a limit to lance sized (4 player) parties. This would make the matchmaking system able to better balance teams.

This idea was partially inspired by a FAQ read talking about Merc Corps where it was stated you could form "lances" to fight, not "companies":

Quote

A. We're trying to be careful with the naming of some features in MechWarrior® Online™ and "clans" is one of them. Players will be able to form their own customized Mercenary Corporations (Merc Corps for short). These operate in the same way that the term clan refers to in other first person shooters. A better way of thinking about Merc Corps is as a "guild". Within the guild you can create Lances("parties") and join matches in that manner.

Of course I'm unsure how this will impact three or four friends who don't want to be in an organized Merc Corp, but do want to play together. I'm sure there would be a temporary party/lance system.

Edited by Kobold, 07 June 2012 - 09:29 AM.

[CapnTytePantz]

I agree with several folks on here, with my own twist: It will depend on the pilot and supporting lances. For example, the Sea Wolves merc corps favors swarm, or pack, tactics utilizing medium-light mech scouts to perform recon for their missile boats and then focus on a single mech, swarming it, to whittle down the enemy one-by-one. Since they are in lighter mechs, they can run circles around the heavier mechs (I know this was featured in the gameplay trailer where a Hunchback and an Atlas are engaged and a Jenner swoops in firing and circling the Atlas). Since they use swarm tactics, others can fire, while others reload/cooldown, thus keeping up a constant barrage on the enemy, which will likely cut them down quite effectively and rather quickly.

Again, the effectiveness of light-medium mechs will rely a lot on teamwork/support, coordination/tactics, and pilot skill. I think you will see a lot of MW veterans suiting up in lights and meds, with some assaults and heavies in the mix, to skirmish and flank heavier mechs and rip 'em to pieces! Skill will become a big factor, as newbs will likely gravitate towards mechs with more armor and greater firepower to feel safe and superior. I personally plan to launch with a Catapult to provide support for the scout mechs, whom I will need to designate targets for my long range volleys. Once I get my mech-legs under me again, I hope to move on to a Centurion as well and branch out to a recon/skirmish role in future battles, but this will all depend on how I'd like to challenge myself. It will be interesting either way, but I feel that the Devs have done a great job in creating roles that pilots can play and play well, combining it with a system that doesn't necessarily favor one mech or playstyle over another. It's gonna be a great mixup! Just sayin'.

[Vilekon]

Brining up WoT sui-scouting reminds me that you could leave the game after you died and run into another battle with a different tank in your garage, so that you can effectivley reap in the rewards for multiple games in the same timeframe because the first battle hadn't ended.

I wonder if this is same in MW:O?

[DoomsdayJesus]

If i understood correctly in the video where PGI discusses role warfare they say that light mechs get xp for lighting up enemy mechs but also for the damage they deal so they expect you to play hit and run tactics and deal damage over time to get more xp, not just passively spot a target then afk. Doing so rewards light mechs xp for damage but doesnt penalize them for not being able to get the killing blow.

[Kobold]

Vilekon, on 07 June 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

Brining up WoT sui-scouting reminds me that you could leave the game after you died and run into another battle with a different tank in your garage, so that you can effectivley reap in the rewards for multiple games in the same timeframe because the first battle hadn't ended.

I wonder if this is same in MW:O?

I hope so. It would suck if you were the first guy down in a match and forced to sit around waiting for the entire battle to end before you could play again. Of course I'd also like to know how the battle turns out even if I leave it, which creates an interesting dilemma.

[SuomiWarder]

So far we have been informed of two match modes, a single lilfe mode and a dop ship mode (I think it was called) where you have four lives for the same battle.

It is assumed that Merc planet capture action will be one life mode.

Given that there does not appear to be splash damage from exploding Mechs, I have no idea why anyone would purposely suicide their light (that they paid for) just to sit out the rest of the game in a one life match. In a four life public match, if you did not have to pay for repairs between lives maybe a few would see it as worthhile, especially if they could swap to a bigger mech they owned between lives.

Will we see light pilots that solo close to within 150 meters of a group of enemy Mechs thinking speed will protect them only to find out the hard way that one or two of the enemy pilots are good gunners ? Assuridly yes. Will that look like a sui-scout run? Probably. Will that same pilot do that again? Probably not.

[Toothman]

Vilekon, on 07 June 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

Brining up WoT sui-scouting reminds me that you could leave the game after you died and run into another battle with a different tank in your garage, so that you can effectivley reap in the rewards for multiple games in the same timeframe because the first battle hadn't ended.

I wonder if this is same in MW:O?

yes

[Tacticalspoon]

Kobold, on 07 June 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

It still baffles me that people keep using WoT for the gameplay comparison.

I feel like this is the case because MWOs f2p model and overall setup seem to be greatly inspired by WoT.

Both games feature the following:

• Instanced arena battles, balanced with an automated matchmaker and with similar victory conditions
  
• Competitive shooter focused less on twitch and more on mechanics knowledge / strategy
  
• Battles composed of war machines of various weights, armaments, capabilities and roles

Even the preorder packages are similar to what WoT offered when it was coming out of beta. Not trying to say that MWO is just a big WoT ripoff (that would be foolish indeed) or that they will play similarly (combat mechanics are quite different, especially the whole same guns/ablative armor aspect of MW), just that some pretty large similarities DO exist and thus some comparisons to WoT are perfectly valid discussion points.

As this topic at hand is about strategy (which will be dictated by combat mechanics), the WoT comparison is not really appropriate. CheeseThief pretty much summed up why not on the first page and I wholly agree with his assessment. Doesn't mean there is nothing to gain by discussing how WoT handled certain things.

Kobold, on 07 June 2012 - 08:45 AM, said:

I feel like sometimes this forum is less a MWO online forum and more of a WoT group therapy session

You're probably not too far off on that, actually. WoT can be a lot of fun to play, but there are some pretty bad design decisions that the dev team made intentionally to make money. Don't be too angry at them for seeing WoT but without said awful design decisions in MWO and being excited about it. Many of them were Mechwarrior fans before they played WoT, and I am guessing most of this WoT talk will die down once more people are actually playing the game.

[Cerlin]

Personally, I love lights. I have been playing Mechwarrior Living Legends for about a month now ( I just found that and this last month) And I am a very good scout/light pilot. I find it is viable all match (in that game, light kills are worth a lot less than bigger classes and you get points for using C3/scouting) so there is no reason for me to upgrade. I do sometimes take a medium brawler or heavy/assault scout if the match lasts too long and I am doing really well.

So no, Ill not suicide scout. I will scout, report, and get kills!