130 replies to this topic

[Treckin]

Could you please consider or consider talking with us a bit about the possibility of choosing your mech AFTER the map selection process has happened?

As it is I own many many mechs, but being forced to build every single one so it can engage effectively in each map is not only 1 dimensional, its getting boring.

I and many other people here would like to specialize more.

The current system makes sense as an alpha build or proof of concept.

Otherwise it doesnt make any sense - why would I be in a RANDOM mech for a PLANNED engagement?

tldr;

Would you consider please allowing mech selection AFTER map selection?

Edited by Treckin, 12 March 2013 - 06:42 AM.

[Mongoose Trueborn]

How about you pick the map and then it picks a mech at random?

[Mechteric]

Only problem would be how would the matchmaker then be able to take drop weights into account when matching people (which it doesn't do currently but will at some point)?

[GODzillaGSPB]

Mongoose Trueborn, on 12 March 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

How about you pick the map and then it picks a mech at random?

Yeah, because that would totally change the problem that the TS mentioned it the very first post, the post above yours. lol

[Zeh]

It's not a problem. It prevents 8 splatcats on River City and 8 PPC/LRM boats on Alpine.

Here's hoping it never goes away.

When we someday get several maps of various types, I wouldn't be against foreknowledge such as "Ice planet". But you should NEVER EVER know the engagement ranges/map size.

[van Uber]

Zeh, on 12 March 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

It's not a problem. It prevents 8 splatcats on River City and 8 PPC/LRM boats on Alpine.

Here's hoping it never goes away.

When we someday get several maps of various types, I wouldn't be against foreknowledge such as "Ice planet". But you should NEVER EVER know the engagement ranges/map size.

This. So much this...

I fully enjoy being dropped out of my comfort zone. I find it challenging to pilot a brawler in Alpine or a LRM-Cat among the houses of River City. That makes it exiting. Everyone running around with the optimal build for each map would make me quit this game in a heart beat.

[Arete]

One trick pony mechs are bad, mmmmkay.

Build it for one thing primarily (my guess is you have brawler mechs or sniper mechs), then add something for the other ranges.

If you have only SRMs, bloody well drop one or two of them for an LRM pack. If you have only MLAS, drop some for an ERLLAS. If you have only PPCs, drop one and add 2-3 MLAS. It's that simple. Build your mech to excel at one thing, but at least be able to do something if your primary focus gets blocked (rushed to brawl range when long ranged, kept at long range when running a brawler).

Specialists are always situational. Don't use one and expect to do well in a situation where it doesn't fit.

If we could choose mechs for each map, alpine would be 95% snipers, and all the other maps will be back to 95% brawlers. True skill is making do with what you have in adverse conditions.

[Treckin]

I agree with the weight class balancing issue. That sounds like an engineering problem.

As it is now, its a design flaw.

If you made the mech selection visible a la League of Legends or any other similar game, then people would likely pick strategically sound combinations.

And to address the 8 splats on Frozen or 8 lrmboats on Alpine:

The map-makers need to address this the way they did by adding the boat to the river in Forrest Colony.

In ANY case the solution is not to force me to always use random hardware on a random map.

[N0ni]

Arete, on 12 March 2013 - 06:57 AM, said:

If we could choose mechs for each map, alpine would be 95% snipers, and all the other maps will be back to 95% brawlers.

And Caustic Valley will have a 90% chance of rain.

[Zeh]

Treckin, on 12 March 2013 - 06:58 AM, said:

I agree with the weight class balancing issue. That sounds like an engineering problem.

As it is now, its a design flaw.

If you made the mech selection visible a la League of Legends or any other similar game, then people would likely pick strategically sound combinations.

And to address the 8 splats on Frozen or 8 lrmboats on Alpine:

The map-makers need to address this the way they did by adding the boat to the river in Forrest Colony.

In ANY case the solution is not to force me to always use random hardware on a random map.

They're not. As I said, I'd be fine with foreknowledge that lets you know what kind of environment you're in.

You should NEVER however, know effective ranges and amount of cover and cover locations available. Then you get to customize your mech to the fight. That goes against the idea of a mech being a flexible combat unit. Mechs are not designed and deployed for one fight.

I am 100% against anything that lets people customize their mech to the map they are going to fight on. It's absolutely against what I view as the basic ideas that are the foundation of this game.

[Shismar]

I would not mind some specialisation for certain maps. Yes, of course it would shift the team composition depending on what map is played. I think that may actually be a good thing.

The matchmaker issue can be circumvented by only offering mechs from the mechbay that are the weight class chosen for launch. It could be even limited to a pre-selection of 3-4 mechs, similar to the quick selector.

So I would like to try this. It is beta after all, best time to try new things. And the in-game mech selector will be required for dropship mode any way.

[MasterGoa]

Though I agree with the OP and with other arguments, I think
that simply choosing normal or vast map would be OK.

They are totally different builds...

[GODzillaGSPB]

Zeh, on 12 March 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

It's not a problem. It prevents 8 splatcats on River City and 8 PPC/LRM boats on Alpine.

Here's hoping it never goes away.

When we someday get several maps of various types, I wouldn't be against foreknowledge such as "Ice planet". But you should NEVER EVER know the engagement ranges/map size.

That's actually a pretty solid point. And I agree. As much as I'd like to disengage my only short range mech (Hunchback 4SP with 2x SRM6, 4x SL, 1x ML) from maps like Alpine or Caustic, the benefit of generally making min-max-boats non-viable outweights that by far.

[Kdogg788]

There will likely never be a real map selector. They will have planet type, by which each map will have a certain probability of coming up dependent on what planet you are on.

-k

[Rebas Kradd]

Zeh, on 12 March 2013 - 06:48 AM, said:

It's not a problem. It prevents 8 splatcats on River City and 8 PPC/LRM boats on Alpine.

So instead you want 8 Splatcats on Alpine and 8 PPC/LRM boats on River City? Because that's what we have now. At least the problem you're describing can be solved by skilled opponents.

[LSlice]

I've thought about this like the OP. If I'm dropping into a place like Alpine or River City, I would outfit my mech for those ranges. Realistically, that's what a pilot would do if he has the garage and the equipment around. On the other hand, not every pilot has the luxury of multiple loadouts and a crew of mechanics to change it for him (or do they? I don't know the lore).
Since we cannot pick and choose our battles because of game design, I find it best to split my loadout and play based on what my load is best suited for. Even my commando with srm's if useful on alpine by staying close to an assault/heavy and screening the enemy light/meds. My primary Centurion can slug throw at range with AC or be in close with AC/ML/SRM. I like versatility.

For the most part I see all maps turn into close quarters anyway.

If we could choose maps it would come down to the matchmaker to prevent 8 catapults on one team. Unless both teams have 8 catapults *gasp*

Edited by LSlice, 12 March 2013 - 07:59 AM.

[KuruptU4Fun]

That would mean that a very few mechs would ever see playtime on certain maps, and the cheese build designs for those maps ever more prominent.

Once PGI gets a hold on MM, I think they should consider this. Make people ready up at least 2 mechs per mode to equal out weight balancing (preferably 4) and let the MM decide what mech you ride in. Then it gives you a higher percentage of GXP to use as you see fit. If you want t o stick with one mech only then you simply have to wait longer for MM to find you a slot.

[ragingmunkyz]

I've made a couple of posts on the subject as well, and I totally agree. It would allow for much more tactical gameplay, especially if teams can talk during the selection process and figure out roles before the match. I've seen plenty of other games that allow you to select a loadout/class before a match, and it tends to result in much more strategic gameplay. It would also allow for even more specialized builds, and you could have a couple of mechs optimized for each map so that you can adjust your playstyle to meet the needs of the situation. I think this mechanic will become a necessity in CW, where (I hope) we will need to play more tactically because the games will have greater meaning.

Aside from that, it just makes good, logical sense. The saying, "you don't bring a knife to a gun fight" applies here; a smart pilot wouldn't bring a brawler to a large, wide-open map.

I don't think it's necessary to restrict tonnage, especially in the current arena format, but I could see it being implemented in a useful way. I think it would work better in CW, and it would be even more interesting if the variables could change from match to match (i.e. no assaults allowed for this match).

I can't find the link, but thankfully PGI have said its something they want to add in the future.

Edited by ragingmunkyz, 12 March 2013 - 08:04 AM.

[Treckin]

KuruptU4Fun, on 12 March 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

That would mean that a very few mechs would ever see playtime on certain maps, and the cheese build designs for those maps ever more prominent.

Once PGI gets a hold on MM, I think they should consider this. Make people ready up at least 2 mechs per mode to equal out weight balancing (preferably 4) and let the MM decide what mech you ride in. Then it gives you a higher percentage of GXP to use as you see fit. If you want t o stick with one mech only then you simply have to wait longer for MM to find you a slot.

The way to balance the various weight and chassis is not to force people to play a random map/mech combination.

To balance those differences it would take actually working on each individual chassis, correct.

Its not balance to just say "oh well, instead of tweaking these numbers so they're balanced, lets make em all random so that it wont matter."

Also, the biggest part of my OP, which has so far gone ignored, is that I own many many many many mechs. Boats, all arounders, flamer/MG griefers.

The point of my OP was that it gets boring following the same equip formula for every mech in my mechbay.

At least if I could chose from my readied mechs AFTER map selection, I might actually have a reason to grab another Atlas DC - so i can have one always ready for brawling and one always ready for peekaboo sniping.

Edited by Treckin, 12 March 2013 - 08:09 AM.

[Zeh]

Rebas Kradd, on 12 March 2013 - 07:54 AM, said:

So instead you want 8 Splatcats on Alpine and 8 PPC/LRM boats on River City? Because that's what we have now. At least the problem you're describing can be solved by skilled opponents.

Yes. I want short-sighted people to get ****** deployments so they stop running unfeasible builds. Your mech might be dropped 5 miles from the enemy across a plain. Even on a mountainy planet. You could be dropped outside the city and only do city fighting on a desert planet.

You do not get to decide the terms of engagement before selecting your mech. It would be (one of) the worst things to happen to this game if that were possible.