213 replies to this topic

[St10invalid_argument]

I actually have a really hard time earning exp in my stalker. I get all the kills, but very low damage. It's called efficiency, and PGI doesn't reward it

[Keifomofutu]

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, on 14 May 2013 - 10:26 PM, said:

I actually have a really hard time earning exp in my stalker. I get all the kills, but very low damage. It's called efficiency, and PGI doesn't reward it

Did you create that as your name because of the bug that displays WWWWWWWWWW as your mech name sometimes?

[Profiteer]

cyberFluke, on 14 May 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

Unfortunately, as PGI have already proved with the lag problem we have; CryEngine and the server hardware, configured and used in the architecture PGI have cannot handle that number of players in one game.

Cannot happen, the system as it is cannot achieve what you suggest.

They are bringing out 12 v 12. Imagine a 600 ton limit.

You could bring 12 hunchbacks, or 6 atlas. Which team would you choose?

Edited by Profiteer, 14 May 2013 - 11:00 PM.

[Elizander]

Keifomofutu, on 14 May 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

I generally think of the assault cost as an intended disincentive to prevent everyone who starts the game from going after the biggest mech first. I don't think assault class needs to make more than the others just because of that.

Assaults are a pain to get three of for casual players like me.

[Reptilizer]

Trauglodyte, on 14 May 2013 - 09:31 AM, said:

The Medium is the Sherman tank of Battletech and will never be the Pershing (front line assault tank) or the Stuart (light forward scout). To put it in terms of today's heavy battlefront, you're not the M1 Abrahm and you're not the flimsy and bastardized Bradley - you're a Striker. Not as fast as the Bradley or with the design intent but faster than the Abrahm but without the punch.

The problem is that people don't want to be supplements. They want to go out and wreck faces. Furthermore, they keep clustering to the fotm weapons and try to jam as much punch into the small frame only to get destroyed by the targets that they shouldn't be going toe to toe with in the first place. To be successful with a Medium, you need someone to take the focus away from you so that you can do your job. You have to watch the flow of combat and adjust to it. Mediums can and will 1v1 an Atlas given the time, space, and liberty and that is a win of hte highest caliber due to the weight difference. But that isn't the design intent of the lighter frame. As I said, people are trying to run Mediums as what they're not only to be disappointed. Then they look at the score boards and read the community boards and see what everyone is shifting to so they join the chorus of "boo hoo, Meds are bad".

Real world anaolgies are fail here. War in reality is largely a game of economics. "Medium" weapon platforms like a Striker do not exist because they excel compared to other weapon types, they exist because they are lots cheaper and still do the job.

MWO lacks economics, so there is no incentive to take anything but the best weapon system available for a certain job.
Mediums do not excel at anything at the moment, so there is no need or incentive to take em.

A game like ours without any relevant economic decision factors has to follow a rock/paper/scissors mechanic to keep the digital assets viable. Everything that drops out from that mechanic, will only get used by newbies and people to whom winning is secondary to nostalgia/game sound/optics or some other reason. Imagine some rock/paper/scissors/sponge, where sponge gets beaten by rock and scissors and can only beat paper. You would take sponge often?

Trauglodyte, on 14 May 2013 - 01:15 PM, said:

I really don't get what some of you want out of your tonnage. This game has limitations and you can only do so much with what you have. At 40-50 tons, you're not going to pack as much weaponry/armor as anything heavier than you and you won't move as quickly as something lighter than you. That doesn't, however, limit you from being effective, supportive, or beneficial. Play to your strengths, whatever they may be based on what you're driving and how you kitted it.

Again, lets play rock/paper/scissors/sponge. Nobody will take sponge if he wants to win. MWO is even worse than this game. Lets assume rock is assault, scissors is heavies, sponge is medium and paper is lights. Incentive for mediums is near zero, because you even have even only a 50% chance of winning against lights.

Waaaay over with bold text and analogies, but i hope it clarifies my previous statements

[Adridos]

Deathlike, on 11 May 2013 - 11:49 PM, said:

The fact that the average Centurion (A and AL) is SLOWER than the Dragon, it deserves some serious attention.

Dragon was designed as a successor to Shadow Hawk, while Centurion was designed because they needed something to defend Trebuchets... and the speed problem prevented it from doing it.

Hunchback was designed as a city fighter mech and asking why does it get a small engine is rather silly.


The fact is, the mechs themselves are fine, but they lack a place. The incentive to bring a Hunchback into the field always was the AC/20, because it is a great gun and all things that wear it cost a fortune and take up a lot of BV. Here, you can stuff an AC/20 into anything you want... there is zero reaon ever to use Hunchabck 4G. Heck, even MW:T which allows much more customisation than MW:O preserves the Hunchabck as the real AC/20 carrier...

[sarkun]

I believe that we need a large overhaul in game balance, if we want all classes to have a role as PGI has stated in the beginning.
Due to recent game improvements (HSR mostly) Heavy and Assault Mechs have become self sufficient - I've only recently picked up my first assault mechs and I'm astounded how easy is to kill a light with a Highlander (streaks & PPCs = dead lights - and BAP is coming...).

The slow mediums are just garbage. Heavies have much better armor and firepower but sacrifice negligible amount of speed and maneuverability.

The only thing that Heavies and Assaults can't do is cap bases, but to that the Heavy & Assault crowd has the answer of: "Capping is for faggots".

If you buy into that - there really is no reason to play medium mech outside of personal preference. Performance wise - you're doing yourself and your team a disservice. Even if you "just had a match where you did X damage and got Y kills". You'd do better in a Heavy.

Edited by sarkun, 15 May 2013 - 06:49 AM.

[Deathlike]

Adridos, on 15 May 2013 - 03:03 AM, said:

Dragon was designed as a successor to Shadow Hawk, while Centurion was designed because they needed something to defend Trebuchets... and the speed problem prevented it from doing it.

Hunchback was designed as a city fighter mech and asking why does it get a small engine is rather silly.

I don't really subscribe to lore in the sense that it must be strictly followed to the letter. What matters more is how the current mechs and variants affects the meta. I'd rather see an overall buff to overall speed for most mediums... not all buffs are to be made equal though. For instance, I still believe that the Hunchback should be slower than its other 50 ton brethren. However, a engine buff to 275 for all Hunchies isn't going to magically change their roles that significantly. This would be followed by a buff to Cents to increase their engine limit to 300.

Quote

The fact is, the mechs themselves are fine, but they lack a place. The incentive to bring a Hunchback into the field always was the AC/20, because it is a great gun and all things that wear it cost a fortune and take up a lot of BV. Here, you can stuff an AC/20 into anything you want... there is zero reaon ever to use Hunchabck 4G. Heck, even MW:T which allows much more customisation than MW:O preserves the Hunchabck as the real AC/20 carrier...

There are a few reasons to have Hunchback-4G over the Hunchback-4H, but that has more to do with the options a Hunchy has for the 4G (like, MGs being total crap). It probably needs some quirks anyways.. so right now there's an obvious choice.

Edited by Deathlike, 15 May 2013 - 06:53 AM.

[Braggart]

Engine size limits are not what hurts Mediums. The bigger engine we mount, the less firepower we can can carry. While Heavies and assaults can mount their max engine, and keep supreme firepower. Seriously, go put a 300 in your Medium, and be slower than a light, but more than twice as big, and then keep in mind you are still an easy target to hit. Bigger engines will fix nothing, it will simply show that a medium still cant do what a light can do.

[MustrumRidcully]

Keifomofutu, on 14 May 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

I generally think of the assault cost as an intended disincentive to prevent everyone who starts the game from going after the biggest mech first. I don't think assault class needs to make more than the others just because of that.

I would actually prefer if it it all mechs cost the same, and lighter mechs got more C-Bills overall out of fighting.

It's not realistic in the slightest, but I prefer it if people can play whatever they want. If you really don't want to play a Light because you heart is set on a Highlander, you should get to play that Highlander just as early as someone that loves Commandos gets to play a Commando.

[MustrumRidcully]

Braggart, on 15 May 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

Engine size limits are not what hurts Mediums. The bigger engine we mount, the less firepower we can can carry. While Heavies and assaults can mount their max engine, and keep supreme firepower. Seriously, go put a 300 in your Medium, and be slower than a light, but more than twice as big, and then keep in mind you are still an easy target to hit. Bigger engines will fix nothing, it will simply show that a medium still cant do what a light can do.

Instead of bigger engines, maybe the speed calculations for mediums need to be altered? Sure, it's lore breaking and all, but then ,if you need to break some lore rules (speed by engine size and weight) to get some lore flavor (Mediums as work horse), then that's what you gotta do.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 15 May 2013 - 07:42 AM.

[Deathlike]

Braggart, on 15 May 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

Engine size limits are not what hurts Mediums. The bigger engine we mount, the less firepower we can can carry. While Heavies and assaults can mount their max engine, and keep supreme firepower. Seriously, go put a 300 in your Medium, and be slower than a light, but more than twice as big, and then keep in mind you are still an easy target to hit. Bigger engines will fix nothing, it will simply show that a medium still cant do what a light can do.

Mediums are supposed to make such tradeoffs. Partly, that is why you would see major build differences between the Cent-D and Trebuchet-3C vs the rest of their variants.

Mediums are not supposed to excel like a light in capping NOR excel at dealing damage like a heavy. They are supposed to be a good combination of the two, and be used to do either role when called upon. Like the Wangs, it's about how you use it.

Edited by Deathlike, 15 May 2013 - 07:50 AM.

[Braggart]

MustrumRidcully, on 15 May 2013 - 07:42 AM, said:

Instead of bigger engines, maybe the speed calculations for mediums need to be altered? Sure, it's lore breaking and all, but then ,if you need to break some lore rules (speed by engine size and weight) to get some lore flavor (Mediums as work horse), then that's what you gotta do.

I dont think that should be the route we go though. Lights fill the fast attack with decent firepower role. Mediums need to fill something else. How to fix them, I dunno, but making them Large light mechs isnt what we should do IMO.

[Braggart]

Deathlike, on 15 May 2013 - 07:50 AM, said:

Mediums are supposed to make such tradeoffs. Partly, that is why you would see major build differences between the Cent-D and Trebuchet-3C vs the rest of their variants.

Mediums are not supposed to excel like a light in capping NOR excel at dealing damage like a heavy. They are supposed to be a good combination of the two, and be used to do either role when called upon. Like the Wangs, it's about how you use it.

are you kidding me....................................................... ARE YOU KIDDING ME................................. Mediums are not a good combination of the 2. they are still slow, dont carry much firepower, nor do they carry the armor There is a heavy mech that can go faster, carry more weapons, and has more armor.

Can you do well in a medium mech, yeah, luck happens. My best games in a medium I do about as well as a mediocre game in a heavy or assault. I dont play my Mediums, like I do my heavy or assaults, but there is only so much a medium can do in a match when the enemy can hit him with 2 volleys and blow off half your weapons.

The game mechanics are against mediums. If we gave mediums the same armor as 65 ton mechs, it would be a bit more equal. Less weapons, but faster, roughly the same size.

The worst has yet to come, as soon as 12vs12 hits. Lights and mediums will be a thing of the past completely. The amount of firepower on the field will result in destruction of lights and mediums, nearly instantly. As seen in most games. There comes a point in time where the amount of firepower present exceeds what any amount of defense can counter. Going to 12vs12 will see that happen. The only thing I think that will possibly stop that is if they put lances on different sides of the maps.

[St10invalid_argument]

Keifomofutu, on 14 May 2013 - 10:29 PM, said:

Did you create that as your name because of the bug that displays WWWWWWWWWW as your mech name sometimes?

Nah, I wanted to make the longest name possible. I find it hilarious to see how it sticks out and doesn't fit in the conventional places.

[Deathlike]

Braggart, on 15 May 2013 - 07:59 AM, said:

are you kidding me....................................................... ARE YOU KIDDING ME................................. Mediums are not a good combination of the 2. they are still slow, dont carry much firepower, nor do they carry the armor There is a heavy mech that can go faster, carry more weapons, and has more armor.

Can you do well in a medium mech, yeah, luck happens. My best games in a medium I do about as well as a mediocre game in a heavy or assault. I dont play my Mediums, like I do my heavy or assaults, but there is only so much a medium can do in a match when the enemy can hit him with 2 volleys and blow off half your weapons.

The game mechanics are against mediums. If we gave mediums the same armor as 65 ton mechs, it would be a bit more equal. Less weapons, but faster, roughly the same size.

The worst has yet to come, as soon as 12vs12 hits. Lights and mediums will be a thing of the past completely. The amount of firepower on the field will result in destruction of lights and mediums, nearly instantly. As seen in most games. There comes a point in time where the amount of firepower present exceeds what any amount of defense can counter. Going to 12vs12 will see that happen. The only thing I think that will possibly stop that is if they put lances on different sides of the maps.

Right, this is why I saw Koreanese winning with a Hunchback-4P in the medium part of the tourney.. and saw a bunch of Centurions during the first grindfest of lore tourney.

The problem is with piloting a medium is that it requires a lot more discipline to succeed in it. It's kinda similar to piloting a light for the purposes of being useful in combat, but they function differently due to fundamental differences. For mediums to succeed, you must hit when you have the opportunity, but also cover your obvious deficiencies. You have a lot more leeway in a heavy and assault due to armor, so for a medium to succeed, you have to really pick and choose your battles.

Every single time I fight a Centurion, I have to decide whether I want to engage with them.. and it sounds simple on paper, but high level usage of mediums exist and I believe they need buffs, but the complaining I've seen shows me that people are not really using them correctly. There's no "easy choice" as you would with the other classes. It's easier to name a particular mech in each weight class that best fits your playstyle, but for a medium, you have to work a bit harder to succeed. That's the reality and plight of the medium mech class.

Personally, all this hyperbole about the medium mechs being "not so useful" is just nonsense.

WWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWWW, on 15 May 2013 - 08:01 AM, said:

Nah, I wanted to make the longest name possible. I find it hilarious to see how it sticks out and doesn't fit in the conventional places.

I commend you for abusing the HUD bug name and finding ways to screw up the forum formatting.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

As so many posters have said, it all comes down to battlefield role. Given that the economics of BattleTech have largely been removed from the game (aside from purchasing stuff initially), the only reason to drive something is if it can fulfill a role that you want to play.

Lights can fulfill three roles very well and a few others not so well. First, they make excellent scouts (especially those with ECM). You can get to a good vantage point with cover very quickly and tell your team where the enemy is and what forces they have, all while being hard to spot in return. Second, lights make for excellent light cavalry. They can move very quickly and put decent firepower on targets from an unexpected direction. They can chase fleeing enemies down with near impunity (but get torn apart if they fall for a Scythian retreat). If they encounter disciplined enemies who have a tight formation and can support each other, they have the speed to get out. Finally, lights can seize objectives. On Assault mode they can get to the enemy base quickly and by following covered or protected paths rather than having to make straight for it by the shortest distance route, and they can respond to enemy base captures in the shortest amount of time. On Conquest lights are the masters of objective control, and sometimes a single light can win the game all by himself if he manages to get a big enough point lead before the fighting largely stops.

Assaults are primarily the heavy infantry of the game. They are slow, un-manueverable, and pack a lot of protection and firepower. They are the core of any mech formation, and excell at steady advances or at holding points on the map. They are weak against manuever and sniping or artillery (speed, long range guns, and LRMs). Obviously individual builds will fulfill different roles within the weight class (artillery builds, sniper builds, etc.).

Heavies generally fulfill one or two roles among several available. They can be heavy cavalry (big engine, lots of armor, decent punch). They can be medium infantry (slower, more firepower, designed to back up the assaults). They can be artillery or sniper builds. In general they're more versatile than assaults are, but can specialize to the same degree as their larger cousins.

What does that leave for mediums? Mediums can be bodyguards, staying close to larger or smaller friendlies and providing the element that their ally lacks (fast medium following some lights can add survivability and firepower; slow medium hanging near assaults can add maneuverability). Mediums can be medium cavalry (good mix of speed, armor, and firepower that allows them to maneuver in groups, taking advantage of their better speed to create local superiority in the face of ostensibly more powerful enemies; also, they can contest objectives pretty effectively). Mediums can also play the sniper or the artillery build, but that mostly works if you combine that with the maneuver element (forward LRM batteries to support your lights, or flanking snipers who can get shots at enemy rear armor), and is generally inferior at this to more dedicated heavy or assault versions of each role.

I play Hunchbacks quite a bit. I run my Founders 4G wtih a 250 engine and an AC20 and 3 ML. I run a 4P with a 260, 2 ML, and 7 SL (it's particularly brutal). I run a 4SP, currenlty with a 260 engine, Streaks, BAP, and a couple LL, but in the past I've done the 4 ML 12 SRM build. Some of my fondest memories of MWO are when I play my Hunchbacks in their proper roles and it pays off in spades, and most of the time when I do badly in them it's because I was trying to be an assault or a light instead of a medium.

In particular, there was one game where a couple of friends and I all dropped in 4SPs with MLs and 2 SRM6s. We found ourselves with a fourth, a random, who also was in a Hunchback (not sure of his build). We decided to move as a pack, do the medium cavalry thing, and try to isolate and tear apart enemies at the edge of their formation. We were on River City, and we moved quickly to occupy the Upper City buildings. We wound up killing almost all of their team, one at a time, simply by always moving, focusing targets down, and using our superior mobility to cut out and destroy one enemy at a time. We dictated the terms of the battle, and we trounced the enemy team handily.

[Braggart]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 15 May 2013 - 08:13 AM, said:

What does that leave for mediums? Mediums can be bodyguards, staying close to larger or smaller friendlies and providing the element that their ally lacks (fast medium following some lights can add survivability and firepower; slow medium hanging near assaults can add maneuverability). Mediums can be medium cavalry (good mix of speed, armor, and firepower that allows them to maneuver in groups, taking advantage of their better speed to create local superiority in the face of ostensibly more powerful enemies; also, they can contest objectives pretty effectively). Mediums can also play the sniper or the artillery build, but that mostly works if you combine that with the maneuver element (forward LRM batteries to support your lights, or flanking snipers who can get shots at enemy rear armor), and is generally inferior at this to more dedicated heavy or assault versions of each role.

no...................................... If you take a medium with a light, you get left behind, If you take a medium with a heavy or assault, you lose against the guy who brought 2 assault or heavies.

Mediums do not have a good mix of speed,, armor, or firepower. They have a joking speed, their armor is subpar, and their firepower slightly more than a light. But their size means speed, and armor are even worse that what a light has. You are a big target that still moves slow enough that its not hard to aim or keep your lasers on target all the time, and your firepower doesnt concern me as much as the Stalker with 4 PPCs, or the Jager with 2 AC 20s. Sure a medium can sting, but the other mechs on the team tear mechs apart.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Braggart, on 15 May 2013 - 08:26 AM, said:

no...................................... If you take a medium with a light, you get left behind, If you take a medium with a heavy or assault, you lose against the guy who brought 2 assault or heavies.

Mediums do not have a good mix of speed,, armor, or firepower. They have a joking speed, their armor is subpar, and their firepower slightly more than a light. But their size means speed, and armor are even worse that what a light has. You are a big target that still moves slow enough that its not hard to aim or keep your lasers on target all the time, and your firepower doesnt concern me as much as the Stalker with 4 PPCs, or the Jager with 2 AC 20s. Sure a medium can sting, but the other mechs on the team tear mechs apart.

By that logic every team should consist entirely of three kinds of mechs. PPC boats, AC20 boats, and a single super fast ECM light to handle the tasks that the real mechs can't. PPC guys engage at range, AC20 guys engage up close, and the lone fast guy either caps (especially on Conquest) or screens the others to prevent the PPC guys on your team from getting shot up-close by the AC20 guys on the other team.

Admittedly I don't play 8v8s, I usually solo drop or run in a small group to help my friends and family out. Maybe that's exactly how team comps go in high-end 8v8 play.

But in a PUG game, if the entire enemy team is either AC20 Jagers or PPC Stalkers or PPC Jump Snipers or whatever then my medium mech has a very interesting match on its hands. Depending on the map, it can be an easy win or a painful loss, and a lot depends on how willing my team is to move out of cover one at a time and get burned down in sequence. Generally speaking, though, I've done just fine in matches with predominantly PPC-carrying heavies and assaults while driving my mediums.

[Braggart]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 15 May 2013 - 08:34 AM, said:

By that logic every team should consist entirely of three kinds of mechs. PPC boats, AC20 boats, and a single super fast ECM light to handle the tasks that the real mechs can't. PPC guys engage at range, AC20 guys engage up close, and the lone fast guy either caps (especially on Conquest) or screens the others to prevent the PPC guys on your team from getting shot up-close by the AC20 guys on the other team.

Admittedly I don't play 8v8s, I usually solo drop or run in a small group to help my friends and family out. Maybe that's exactly how team comps go in high-end 8v8 play.

But in a PUG game, if the entire enemy team is either AC20 Jagers or PPC Stalkers or PPC Jump Snipers or whatever then my medium mech has a very interesting match on its hands. Depending on the map, it can be an easy win or a painful loss, and a lot depends on how willing my team is to move out of cover one at a time and get burned down in sequence. Generally speaking, though, I've done just fine in matches with predominantly PPC-carrying heavies and assaults while driving my mediums.

A lot of it has to do with ELO. If enemies are having trouble hitting you with weapons and you are in a medium. Its because the enemy cant aim, not because you are good. I cant count the amount of times that i have neutered a medium in 4 seconds. 2 volleys into the side torso, and they are screwed.