174 replies to this topic

[Jestun]

tenderloving, on 20 June 2013 - 06:14 AM, said:

"adapt or die" always makes me smirk, because it carries so much hypocrisy. If the person spewing this nonsense really walked the walk, they wouldn't be commenting on any balance changes.

If you can truly adapt to any situation, then you shouldn't be giving your opinion, or even have the desire to weigh in on any debate. You are above the game, and you can succeed regardless of what it throws at you because of your adaptability. If anything, constant extreme nerfs and buffs give you, the ultimate adapter, an advantage over your slowly evolving opponents.

Exactly, that's why "adapt or die" people have no place in balance discussion. They can just adapt quietly. In the meantime people that actually want a balanced game can provide feedback.

[Fyrerock]

tenderloving, on 20 June 2013 - 06:14 AM, said:

"adapt or die" always makes me smirk, because it carries so much hypocrisy. If the person spewing this nonsense really walked the walk, they wouldn't be commenting on any balance changes.

If you can truly adapt to any situation, then you shouldn't be giving your opinion, or even have the desire to weigh in on any debate. You are above the game, and you can succeed regardless of what it throws at you because of your adaptability. If anything, constant extreme nerfs and buffs give you, the ultimate adapter, an advantage over your slowly evolving opponents.

The only way to make brawling the primary way to play this game is to nerf all other types of styles, to the point they are useless. Right now you have both a range and close game, and it is up to the player to pick the style he wants to outfit his mech with. All these cries for nerfs is about making brawling king again, where the brawler can run straight through open ground taking very little damage, until he can engage at close range.

Pugs want to have fun, they do not want to be steam rolled 9 times out of 10, at least with a range game they have a chance at winning, because they are able to weaken the enemy before the brawling starts. I do not know about you guys but the majority of fights I am in come down to the sub 200 M range.

Purlana, on 19 June 2013 - 07:03 PM, said:

That's because everyone else is too busy sniping to help a brawler. Getting a PUG to push is like pulling teeth.

If you are not outfitted to brawl, why would you follow that brawler over a hill straight in a group of enemy mechs

[Soy]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 June 2013 - 07:21 PM, said:

not when it totally changes the meta and forces everyone else to play that same style to compete. You sound like a smoker declaring it's your right to smoke next to my toddler.

That is a right, I would definitely blow smoke rings in your baby's face. Deal with it.

[Volthorne]

Soy, on 20 June 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

That is a right, I would definitely blow smoke rings in your baby's face. Deal with it.

Just like you have the right to throw a punch, but your rights end where my nose begins?

Edited by Volthorne, 20 June 2013 - 02:05 PM.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Fyrerock, on 20 June 2013 - 06:29 AM, said:

If you are not outfitted to brawl, why would you follow that brawler over a hill straight in a group of enemy mechs

Let's take this a bit farther ... the typical match seems to begin with a long range/sniping duel, and end with a brawl.

What prompted the brawler to push? Did he spot an opening, or is he just impatient?

While wading into the fray is probably not the best maneuver for a sniper or missile boat, but if you don't move to a new position -- one with a better line of fire to the enemy -- at the same time, you're probably wasting an opportunity. While the enemy is focusing fire on your brawlers, they may be exposed to you. During the firefight, people will make mistakes. Experienced players will make fewer mistakes and better capitalize on the mistakes their enemy makes.

Could the brawler have been better about communicating his intentions and communicating with his fire support? Absolutely. Is it likely that the first guy over the hill is going to survive, with or without fire support? No, but if he doesn't get that fire support, his death is wasted.

Take the risk. Stay on the periphery, and Ideally behind or near good cover, but use his attack for the distraction you need to get an advantage over the enemy. Almost any military commander will tell you that an imperfect plan executed with swift and violent action now is better than a perfect plan executed tomorrow.

I really think we need to have the ability to discuss a match after it's over, so that we can all become better team players. If the brawler understands better why the snipers don't want to move, and vice versa, both will continue to improve.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 20 June 2013 - 01:19 PM.

[Purlana]

Think of it this way.

Team 1 has 5 fire support.
Team 2 has 7 fire support.

If brawlers just hide behind cover for too long, your FS will probably lose the long range fight giving you a large numbers disadvantage.

Because it's so hard to get your team to push together, why bother running a brawler?

This is why everyone and their mother runs FS.

Edited by Purlana, 20 June 2013 - 02:20 PM.

[aniviron]

Fyrerock, on 19 June 2013 - 06:57 PM, said:

up close and personal how often does a brawler loose to a sniper, about the only time I am able to pull it off is if I get a lucky head shot on the brawler. Even medium brawler mechs have it easy against assault snipers if they get close, and almost every single fight in the end gets close and personal.

About the only time I see brawlers have problems is the assault brawler mech that will go over a hill and engage 3 plus snipers at once then call OP when they die a few seconds later.

Really? My experience as a hunchback brawler in the jumpsnipe meta was that they would turn around and shoot me once in the leg or twice in the ct or once in the hunch and I would be dead, because 45 points of damage is 45 points of damage, even at close range. The only time closing range ever worked is if the were using all standard ppcs for some reason, which rarely happens. Even then, one gauss + one er ppc is pretty effective when you have twice my armor.

[Joseph Mallan]

Soy, on 20 June 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

That is a right, I would definitely blow smoke rings in your baby's face. Deal with it.

Ya wouldn't want me to "deal with it". You really wouldn't.

[Bishop Steiner]

Soy, on 20 June 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

That is a right, I would definitely blow smoke rings in your baby's face. Deal with it.

oh, I would. and more effectively than I deal with lights in this game (of course, I hope I do most things IRL more effectively than I deal with lights in this game, but that is another matter...).

[I am]

My toddler will blow smoke rings at you.

[Lycan]

SpiralRazor, on 18 June 2013 - 07:08 AM, said:

[..]but please start contacting the top end players and listen to there feedback.[...]

And then once you've talked to those people, take any mech, weapon or piece of equipment they don't use out of the game.

Because clearly, these "top level players" know exactly what's what. And if they aren't using something, then it doesn't belong in the game and therefore, you [devs] shouldn't be wasting anymore time on it.

Inhibition, on 19 June 2013 - 04:35 PM, said:

People don't understand; it seems like all the complaints want every mech to carry the exact same weapon.

Your comment is basically what SpiralRazor and "The Gang" are going for.

For some reason, all the "super elite" and "super skilled" players seem to think that being "super competitive" opens up more diversity. When, in fact, it does the opposite as the "super Groups" all converge on one build/loadout/setup and that's the only on that gets used.

So all the people that are complaining about balance actually want mechs to carry more than X PPCs and Y Gauss Rifles.

It's the "super elites" that are rooting for every mech (and by this I mean, the only mech left in the game when their done with it) carrying the exact same weapon(s).