15 replies to this topic

[Soy]

From the beginning of a game's life cycle through it's maturation and eventually in the late (stagnant) periods, there are always what people find to be the power builds, whether or not they are a part of the 'popular/casual' scene or the 'competitive/end game' scene.

This particular game itself has featured power builds and certain mechanics that have taken ahold of the meta throughout the various phases from closed beta to the present, and beyond.

Here is a brief list I've compiled in a couple minutes of pillars, power builds, or culturally relevent mechanics or tactics that have made an appearance in this game, attempted in chronological order -

Supercrazy engine sizes
Dragon knockdowns
LRM boating/borked time
Jenners with 1 jump jet
Catapult streakcat
ECM, leading into
raven 3l cheese
atlas ddcs
8 man imbalance
gauss changes
splatcat
first energy changes
poptarting reaching critical mass
state rewind 1
trebuchet packs
coolant
alpha becoming somewhat popular
second ppc changes [state rewind p2]
serious boating
HM, more poptarting, serious boating, coolant

remember this is a brief list, I typed this on the fly while chatting with a guy in about 3-4 minutes.

Many of these I feel are directly related to the nature of the entire game being a beta, with incomplete systems, and needing various tweaks along the way. Some I feel are consistantly powerful concepts or builds, mechs, etc.

For example, the PPC. The PPC is a true pillar weapon, in various forms, within the BT universe. It is probably the quintessential BT weapon that comes to mind, maybe I'm wrong. Is it wrong for it to be powerful? Is it wrong for it to be relevent among both high end players and casuals? Will it be replaced?

Are there issues that deal with all of these things that you feel could be brought up or challenged? Fixed? Are they good? Are we just infants starting a new game and building all of this from the ground up? Are some of us approaching MWO with old ideals about this game due to it being BT? Are some of us only concerned with winning at the cost of everything else? Are we all having enough fun yet? What else is there that we can find out about this game and shed light upon... I know there are other cool things, and the best ones the clever people haven't let out yet. ^^

Beyond the mechanical nature of things is a slight delay of the community actually interacting with a weapon. Example - if theoretically nobody had ever made a 6 er ppc stalker, and you ran up against it and it 1 shot you alpha in the face from 600m out, you'd be very intrigued by what just happened. If you died to a bunch of weapons while fighting 1 v 4, it's probably not noticable what was really putting the hurt on you or countering your tactics. Point is, there is a development period within the community of nurturing and progressing builds, tactics, and playstyles into the relevent meta of the game. It takes a bit of time. This also shows that the only way something becomes relevent or considered powerful in this game is by actually using it, scores of players aren't just convinced to build something and start playing it all the time cuz they read it on some forum in text. It needs to be visceral. This is why I think a lot of the issues regarding the way the game is played at the moment are community and meta issues almost as much as they are mechanical and balance related problems.

Comments, criticisms, glaring problems, whatever, post em, I'm interested to hear your thoughts. This isn't some sort of bash, this isn't some sort of troll or fanboy post, I'm merely posting thoughts I've had and discussed with others on these issues and I think they are worth exploring. Thanks for reading.

Edited by Soy, 17 April 2013 - 07:58 AM.

[LordBraxton]

The current meta is defined by 2 recent changes

PPC overbuff (huge buff to all direct fire sniper builds)

SRM overnerf (huge nerf to all brawlers)

I agree with most of your post though, and your list is pretty spot on bar trebuchet packs

There may have been treb packs when it released but they weren't scary, much less OP

Edited by LordBraxton, 17 April 2013 - 07:58 AM.

[Soy]

LordBraxton, on 17 April 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

There may have been treb packs when it released but they weren't scary, much less OP

Yeah this isn't about stuff that's necessarily OP, some of it is just about being 'relevent' or progressive for the meta and our development.

I prolly should've said that. :|

[Madw0lf]

LordBraxton, on 17 April 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

The current meta is defined by 2 recent changes

PPC overbuff (huge buff to MOST direct fire sniper builds)

SRM overnerf (huge nerf to MOST brawlers)

Fixed that for ya

[merz]

thought to put down some notes on all of this: if you look at most of the previous biases in weapon loadouts, they reflected the situation of their day: smaller map sizes favoured one-dimensional brawler loadouts, net code issues, hit boxes and bugs affecting damage spread to legs made people cry foul with ECM rendering ravel 3L's nearly invulnerable, with streaks an counter mode being the only reliable way of dealing with them. The same small maps and splash damage multiplication (made more evident with the fixes to damage-resistance of legs, etc) brought about the brief glory days of splatcats and LRM boating.. but what we're seeing today is entirely different, in that its probably the first time in MWO that the prevalent playstyle is not rooted in exploitation of technical issues the game is experiencing.

PPCs or 'boating' in general is something that there isn't any sort of a clear solution to. If we look back to the earlier days, the boating was simply done with medium lasers. It seemed as though battles took longer because so many of the shots you were firing registered no damage.This is no longer the case. With disciplined target calling and dedicated loadouts, a lance enjoying superior teamwork and communication will melt targets at range effectively. And so, a lot of the time the suggestion to 'nerf ppcs' or 'nerf boating' really becomes something altogether different on the level of 'detect if other players are using voice communications outside the game and keep them from dropping with me' I think we can all agree upon this sort of thing being ridiculous.

That said, PPCs and other ranged weapons were adjusted in a time before state rewind, and several things can probably be done to give close-range options more of a chance, if piloted well. Perhaps the most obvious of these is increasing convergence across the board - the entire point of convergence has been, as I understood it, to prevent the kind of whack-a-mech travesty you may remember from MW4/Mektek. PGI took very active measures in designing MWO to discourage this sort of thing and its not unfeasible to imagine that either increasing convergence time across the board or perhaps a slight increase to convergence while jump jets are firing.

The other thing that I can't for the life of me understand is why we have coolant in its current implementation. 6PPC stalkers and 6LL mechs did exist before the advent of coolant, but often were laughed at as comedy options or newbs setting themselves up for BBQ on a spit. Nowadays you're seeing builds that run too hot to live because, hey, chuggin' coolant, bro. SKILL, bro. I'm not sure the balance of this game's weapons at all needs such a thing as coolant, but, looking forward, it should be implemented - even if still a consumable - as an actual piece of hardware in the loadout, taking up critical space, tonnage and having chance to explode same as ammunition or a gauss rifle. Its fine if the actual coolant charges for it are consumable 'ammo' that must be purchased before each round, but the current implementation is wackarnolds.

Anyway, part of what i'm saying here is that particular choice of strategy adopted by the mainstream is not necessarily the only viable strategy that is clearly overpowered. Much as with half the assaults dropping right now being a highlander, the LL/PPC intensity will subside somewhat and, with some thoughtful changes to convergence, other play styles which are already viable with effective teamwork will become even more competitive.

Edited by merz, 17 April 2013 - 08:49 AM.

[Soy]

Nice post merz, thanks for your well put thoughts.

[AnnoyingCat]

good times, good times

[Agent 0 Fortune]

merz, on 17 April 2013 - 08:42 AM, said:

PPCs or 'boating' in general is something that there isn't any sort of a clear solution to. If we look back to the earlier days, the boating was simply done with medium lasers. It seemed as though battles took longer because so many of the shots you were firing registered no damage.This is no longer the case. With disciplined target calling and dedicated loadouts, a lance enjoying superior teamwork and communication will melt targets at range effectively. And so, a lot of the time the suggestion to 'nerf ppcs' or 'nerf boating' really becomes something altogether different on the level of 'detect if other players are using voice communications outside the game and keep them from dropping with me' I think we can all agree upon this sort of thing being ridiculous.

That said, PPCs and other ranged weapons were adjusted in a time before state rewind, and several things can probably be done to give close-range options more of a chance, if piloted well. Perhaps the most obvious of these is increasing convergence across the board - the entire point of convergence has been, as I understood it, to prevent the kind of whack-a-mech travesty you may remember from MW4/Mektek. PGI took very active measures in designing MWO to discourage this sort of thing and its not unfeasible to imagine that either increasing convergence time across the board or perhaps a slight increase to convergence while jump jets are firing.

The rise of PPC utilization can be attributed to several factors.

• Reduced heat for these weapons
  
• Increased ballistic speed, PPCs are now the fastest ballistic projectile.
  
• They are the “counter” for ECM
  
• Massive LRM nerf. LRMs generally kept PPCs in check
  
• Increase in jump capable mechs making poptarting more common (making cheap, burst damage weapons more appealing).
  
• Cooling modules, making heat management less of an issue.
  
• State rewind. PPC (and ballistics) used to be a poor choice for dealing with lag-shield mechs, now they are more effective than any other weapon (laser and missile tend to spread damage, while PPC and AC burst will quickly cripple light mechs).
  
• Double Heatsinks, especially true 2.0x engine heat sinks).

The only mitigating factor implemented to help with PPCs is damage to internals for high heat, which I have never seen applied.

The best way to deal with PPCs probably through heat management.

• Increase heatload of PPCs (and ER) by 1
  
• Base heat cap on number of heat sinks not cooling capability (As I understand it your heat cap 100% is equal to 20 + effective cooling, so 20 double heat sinks = 20 (base) + 20 (2x 10 engine DHS) + 14 (1.4 x 10 external DHS) = 54 heat. But changing it to total HS would mean 20 + 20 = 40 heat cap, which means 4 PPC maximum alpha to avoid shutdown. This will also give Single Heat sinks a use, since they can be used to get a much higher heat cap, but players that choose that route will have an increased risk vs. reward due to the reduced cooling of SHS.
  
• Increase Internal damage for overheat. Currently it isn’t even noticeable, but if mechs took 1 internal damage for every point of heat over the heat cap, players would have to manage their heat better.

[Soy]

I love the analysis Agent

[LordBraxton]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 17 April 2013 - 09:59 AM, said:

The rise of PPC utilization can be attributed to several factors.

• Reduced heat for these weapons
  
• Increased ballistic speed, PPCs are now the fastest ballistic projectile.
  
• They are the “counter” for ECM
  
• Massive LRM nerf. LRMs generally kept PPCs in check
  
• Increase in jump capable mechs making poptarting more common (making cheap, burst damage weapons more appealing).
  
• Cooling modules, making heat management less of an issue.
  
• State rewind. PPC (and ballistics) used to be a poor choice for dealing with lag-shield mechs, now they are more effective than any other weapon (laser and missile tend to spread damage, while PPC and AC burst will quickly cripple light mechs).
  
• Double Heatsinks, especially true 2.0x engine heat sinks).

The only mitigating factor implemented to help with PPCs is damage to internals for high heat, which I have never seen applied.

The best way to deal with PPCs probably through heat management.

• Increase heatload of PPCs (and ER) by 1
  
• Base heat cap on number of heat sinks not cooling capability (As I understand it your heat cap 100% is equal to 20 + effective cooling, so 20 double heat sinks = 20 (base) + 20 (2x 10 engine DHS) + 14 (1.4 x 10 external DHS) = 54 heat. But changing it to total HS would mean 20 + 20 = 40 heat cap, which means 4 PPC maximum alpha to avoid shutdown. This will also give Single Heat sinks a use, since they can be used to get a much higher heat cap, but players that choose that route will have an increased risk vs. reward due to the reduced cooling of SHS.
  
• Increase Internal damage for overheat. Currently it isn’t even noticeable, but if mechs took 1 internal damage for every point of heat over the heat cap, players would have to manage their heat better.

agreed

add one thing

SRMs to 2.5 dmg

[Hobo Dan]

I don't really use them myself, so maybe I have no business commenting.

But is coolant flush really THAT big of a contributing factor to the prevalence of the 6 PPC Stalkers and other high heat, high alpha builds? I just don't understand how a consumable item that can only be used a max of twice a match can make that big of a difference.

On your other points, good read, I enjoy discussions of meta game, which can and often do become more interesting and complex than the game itself, imo.

Edited by Hobo Dan, 17 April 2013 - 10:14 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

These things are infinitely worse with the amount of customization allowed in this version of Mechwarrior.

If they'd revamp the hardpoint system, you could limit the amount of craziness.

Right now if there is one overpowered weapon, you can be sure people are going to stick as many as possible into their mech.

I think tiered hardpoints are looking better and better as this game moves along. But I know a lot of people LOVE being able to min-max as much as possible.

Hopefully if they ever get lobbies into the game, there will be some kind of option to get away from it.

[Lord Banshee]

Just for archive purposes, but from CB Day 1, the 8-laser Cat, and then after nerf, the 6-laser Cat each required a nerf.
Also there was gnashing of teeth about flamers not causing heat to the flame-user. More annoying than OP.

[DjKonline]

now again, knowing that the meta game has changed due to weapons/maps/features the next question to help lead this back to a constructive conversation. What new changes on the pipeline will change current meta ( speculive to a degree since we don't know how they work in game play ) 12 mans/CW/knockdown

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

PPCs and ERPPCs are plenty hot as-is. I'd rather see a slight ROF nerf (really, rate of fire is the fix for a lot of weapon systems).

I had a thought about PPC minimum ranges. What if, in addition to damage fall-off as you got closer, firing a PPC inside the minimum range would deal the lost damage to the location where the PPC was mounted. Say you're at 60m and you do 5 damage to the enemy, you're PPC location would take the other 5.

[Blackadder]

While I agree with agent in regards to why large weapons, not just ppcs, are seeing widespread use I am not sure that his proposal will really resolve much beyond ppcs. People will just shift to the next best weapon system. I do think increased damage or downtime while overheated will help quite a bit with large weapons, it will just shift focus back to medium lasers or other manageable system. The clan tech introduction will just cause the same issue to occur again, without fixing it.

the only way I can see fixing it is putting in either tiered hardpoints or a tiered weapon range system or possibly both.the main issue of doing either of these things though is the time spent programming the software, and the perceived negative impact on players. The more I think about it though, the more I think minimum and maximum range limits would be the best system. It will still allow choice for players but add consequence to the choice