174 replies to this topic

[Pater Mors]

Volthorne, on 15 June 2013 - 12:12 AM, said:

If you didn't have problems with it you ran a candy-*** Light and base-capped (or you were also poptarting and always missed being up when they were). Not to say I didn't do it myself a few times when I got fed up with being pinned down in my lurm-support C1. That's just how the situation was.

I disagree. I didn't run a 'candy-*** light' and base-cap (only when appropriate). I generally ran a C1 or a 733C with no JJ's or a Treb 3C. I had much less problems with the poptarts than everyone else seemed to. Sure, I occasionally suffered some pain when I made a mistake but otherwise it was pretty much business as usual.

Both LRMApocalypses were worse than Poptarting, at least for me.

[BigMekkUrDakka]

Volthorne, on 15 June 2013 - 12:12 AM, said:

If you didn't have problems with it you ran a candy-*** Light and base-capped (or you were also poptarting and always missed being up when they were). Not to say I didn't do it myself a few times when I got fed up with being pinned down in my lurm-support C1. That's just how the situation was.

wrong, i just lurk behind covers spot poptart camping spot, shot him as soon as he starts ascending, then change my cover and repeat, and yes most poptarts almost never change they position so its hilarious how much damage they was taking then they shown their mug over the same cover in the 3rd time
yeah against good poptart players who dosent rely on PT as their only tactic it was ... the same as against any decent player without JJ

[Jaguar Prime]

Volthorne, on 15 June 2013 - 12:12 AM, said:

If you didn't have problems with it you ran a candy-*** Light and base-capped (or you were also poptarting and always missed being up when they were). Not to say I didn't do it myself a few times when I got fed up with being pinned down in my lurm-support C1. That's just how the situation was.

Actually no, you had problems with it if you couldn't shoot farther than 500m, or couldn't land a shot on them with travel time weapons, or didn't know how to move under cover. And the sad part is people had the hardest time with the bad poptarts. you know the ones who stood behind one building the entire match and never moved...... The ones who had no clue what a lateral jump was......

[PEEFsmash]

Jaguar Prime, on 15 June 2013 - 12:15 AM, said:

I disagree with your reasoning. In a competitive environment, stripping a poptart of his mobility is a very good idea for numerous reasons.

If disabling mobility had no opportunity cost, sure. However, shooting for legs means time wasted that could have been spent shooting CT. As was pointed out before, good poptarts never show their legs anyway. The only time you would EVER want to shoot legs of a poptart would be in a light attempting to do a 1v1.

Edited by PEEFsmash, 15 June 2013 - 12:25 AM.

[Xmith]

Volthorne, on 14 June 2013 - 11:42 PM, said:

A "good" poptart shouldn't be exposing their legs in the first place. Less time in the air, less time for the enemy to shoot you, smaller target presented.

True. That's why I went from 4 down to 2 jets. I would for the most part keep my thumb down to long with 4 jets. 2 jets seems to be better overall. The best part, shake is not as bad. Sometimes I close my eyes when I attempt to jump snipe. It probably gives me a better chance to hit something.



That was the way I adapted

[Volthorne]

Pater Mors, on 15 June 2013 - 12:20 AM, said:

Both LRMApocalypses were worse than Poptarting, at least for me.

I think you would have had a blast back in CB, when lurms didn't need you to hold a lock and there was no ECM to block you getting one. And cover? Nah, lurms just flew through it. Basically you brought an AMS and you were going to be relatively okay, but if you didn't...

Jaguar Prime, on 15 June 2013 - 12:24 AM, said:

Actually no, you had problems with it if you couldn't shoot farther than 500m, or couldn't land a shot on them with travel time weapons, or didn't know how to move under cover. And the sad part is people had the hardest time with the bad poptarts. you know the ones who stood behind one building the entire match and never moved...... The ones who had no clue what a lateral jump was......

Or if your weapons had a lock-on time and all your spotters were pinned down and couldn't move without getting toasted. The really good poptarts would get a buddy and do a cycle where one would go up and then the other so they could get near-100% coverage.

BigMekkUrDakka, on 15 June 2013 - 12:20 AM, said:

wrong, i just lurk behind covers spot poptart camping spot, shot him as soon as he starts ascending, then change my cover and repeat, and yes most poptarts almost never change they position so its hilarious how much damage they was taking then they shown their mug over the same cover in the 3rd time
yeah against good poptart players who dosent rely on PT as their only tactic it was ... the same as against any decent player without JJ

Anyone with half a brain would see what you're doing after one or two jumps and then start "baiting" you by jumping up a bit and then doing the actual jump so you waste/miss your shots. The ones with full brains would do jumps at random intervals with a random number of "bait" jumps.

Edited by Volthorne, 15 June 2013 - 12:34 AM.

[Jaguar Prime]

Pater Mors, on 15 June 2013 - 12:05 AM, said:

You'll still get matched against newbies unless you are at the very top ELO tier. It's unavoidable because the matchmaker uses an average ELO of all players in the match, rather than directly matching ELO ratings. So what happens there is if one team's ELO is too high, they will get a 'newbie' thrown in to drop the average.

This is the precise reason that I don't run FOTM builds. Yeah they're super effective and all that crap... they're also super boring. Give me a versatile Highlander with no JJ's over a Poptart every day of the week.

I understand how it works. And my point still stands. If the are that talented, they need to be in the very top Elo tier.......

[DerSpecht]

Jaguar Prime, on 15 June 2013 - 12:33 AM, said:

I understand how it works. And my point still stands. If the are that talented, they need to be in the very top Elo tier.......

And if theres not enuff players to match em they'll wait for hours or play 2 on 3.. yayyy

[Soy]

[aniviron]

Jaguar Prime, on 15 June 2013 - 12:24 AM, said:

Actually no, you had problems with it if you couldn't shoot farther than 500m, or couldn't land a shot on them with travel time weapons, or didn't know how to move under cover. And the sad part is people had the hardest time with the bad poptarts. you know the ones who stood behind one building the entire match and never moved...... The ones who had no clue what a lateral jump was......

Or you were using a laser weapon so that the damage got spread all across their mech, if you were lucky enough for them to even be in the air for a full second so you could get all the damage in, somehow. Or you were using LRMs that had travel time and could never hope to hit a poptart. Or had a brawling loadout, gods forbid.

I know your response is going to be "l2use ppc nub," which kind of illustrates the root cause of poptarting. I think the 'fix' that was applied was clunky and stopgap as best, but right now direct-fire weapons that do not spread their damage are just head and shoulders above everything else; poptarting was a problem because it enabled people who would otherwise not be good enough to utilize such weapons effectively to do so with minimal chance of retaliation. A better fix would have been to either make non-ppc/gauss weapons viable, or to bring their damage back in line with their tonnage and heat costs.

As things were, the only counters to poptarting were either: bring a direct fire weapon like pcc/gauss and hit them when they come up, or flank them without them or any of their teammates noticing and hope you have enough close range firepower to bring them down before three alphas core and kill you. So it's great that there were counters to poptarting- I used both, and to everyone else who did, congratulation. The problem is, both tactics required you to be much better than your opponent, which means that in mid-level play, the poptart should almost always win. Situation 1 (you brought your own ppc/gauss) requires that you let your opponent dictate the terms of the engagement, because you have to wait until he leaves cover. That means that you cannot afford to get into other fights while he might have a sightline on you, and that he is only going to fire when he has the heat cap and relative cover from fire to do so. He also has time to prepare his shot, given that he knows he is about to fire on you. You, on the other hand, have to return fire when he wants to you- so you might already be in a fight, or closeclose to your heat cap. It also means you have to be watching the ridge where the poptart is hiding, because looking away means you might miss a shot, while the poptart gets to maneuver at will. Situation 2, where you flank and kill the poptart requires that you have better tactical knowledge of the battlefield than your opponent, and that either his teammates are dead or he is out of position. If you surprise him, then great- good job winner. Unless your opponent was clever enough to poptart from the middle of his team's campground, or in a spot that is very difficult to approach from the sides or back. Again, if your opponent is as good as you are, he has an advantage, simply because combining a precise high damage alpha with jumpjets is very easy and very effective. It is good that there is at least a stopgap measure in place to stop popping right now, as seismic almost completely invalidates flanking at this time.

[Cybermech]

do you even know what skill is?
cause for the last few months this game had not required anyone to have any skill what so ever.

Jump Jet sniping is not a valid tactic. don't care who says it is.
There are 2 things that have been ruining MW games for a long time.
Poptarting and lagging over the hill, alpha strike then reverse back over the hill.
Both require little skill and anything that disrupts this behavior is a +

[M e g a M a n X]

Xmith, on 14 June 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

You can have the appearance of weapon balance but because of the skill level of players, the game itself can never have balanced play.

Weapons are not OP, the skill level of players makes the game appear unbalanced. Take the jump snipers for example. People shouted and cried that they were making the game unbalanced. It seems most hated jump snipers. People were full aware that there are snipers in the game. Knowing this fact, they still chose not to use cover. What were the snipers suppose do? Tell them to get back under cover before they shoot them? All this has been discussed and the snipers were basically saying what not to do if you don't what to be sniped.

That was just one example. Some recent nerfs seem to be geared toward the less skilled. In itself it seems to make sense. The devs trys to help out people so that they can have fun and enjoy the game. It's a losing cause because competitive player skill level will never happen. Especially if PGI is working toward a high player count.

If this is really true, then i think it's time for the skilled players to step up as a group and present their balance suggestions.

Really.

We've heard make ELO public etc. but what after that? they still have to present their opinion.
What's the difference if they present it now compared to later? PGI will listen to them more bcoz ELO is public? From what a lot of the players' input PGI can already view a player's ELO. They have known each player's ELO here in the forum and still they decided to do what they've done.

Maybe because high level players still have a weak voice?

It's time the highly skilled players set some time as a group and let PGI hear their concrete opinion about balance changes here in the forum especially the ones who say

"make ELO public" - after this what will you suggest about gameplay balance?
"because high level players this, high level players that"
"because low level players this, low level players that"

But what do they really want?

They should make a public statement or whatever

Whatever they are thinking, make it known to PGI as a group. As a loud voice. Nothing will happen with only a few representatives disagreeing to the recent balance changes compared to the majority of "whining" of "low-level players" here in the forum.

Sadly, if they really want to be heard by PGI, they should set aside some time aside from playing to make themselves heard. What do they want exactly? From what i see most of them only come here to disagree on matters but rarely presents what exactly do they want.

"It was a stupid idea to nerf jump jets. It disrupted high-level play" - whatever something like this
- this says they disagree with what PGI did but does not say exactly what they want. Should PGI revert it back to what it was?

Then say it all together. "We want the usual Poptarting Back! PGI you made a big mistake! We want Poptarting Back!" Say it together with all those high level players and maybe PGI would do it. Stop playing for a while.

Hate the current/upcoming Heat system? Say it (this has been done a lot from what i've read recently).
Then present what you have in mind. "PGI do not make the Heat system changes you're planning to make!"
(this has been done too).

Make your statement. Tell them exactly what you want. Then wait for their response.


Like the OP (and other people here, you know them), complaining about the recent balance changes but not saying exactly what they want to change in gameplay balance. What does he want exactly if he disagrees with the current game?

If they just complain and complain without suggesting anything to improve the game, then it's just like whining.

Because if you do nothing, nothing will really happen. The game will continue to be "thrown off and become geared towards he less skilled."

Of course PGI will respond to what they see in the forum instead of what is being "murmured" between high-level players, or the side comments about the game mentioned in other parts of the forum.

Start suggesting something instead of just complaining and disagreeing with PGI. If you have a lot of time to do that then start saying your piece to improve the game.

Really. Start talking together high-level players (you know them.. wait, i should join them too haha) Instead of just disagreeing/complaining. Then let's listen to what you want, what you have to say. .

If you just did, then wait for PGI's response. Afterwards if it's stll not according to your tastes. Then do what you want afterwards. Your choice.

Edited by M e g a M a n X, 15 June 2013 - 01:38 AM.

[Victor Morson]

Neverfar, on 14 June 2013 - 10:16 PM, said:

This game doesn't need a country-club forum. They already have that in World of Tanks among other places and it actually heightens the stupid posturing and reduces quality of discussion into e-peen contests.

Nobody ever said we needed a forum.

Firing off emails to the best units leaders to collect their opinions on balance? Sure. I'm talking like a dozen representatives in total, not some kind of "top 10% board" or something stupid.

M e g a M a n X, on 15 June 2013 - 01:32 AM, said:

If they just complain and complain without suggesting anything to improve the game, then it's just like whining.

Have you even read the forums? There are literally dozens of excellent, well reasoned suggestions. Maybe hundreds. For these very issues in the various threads.

[M e g a M a n X]

Victor Morson, on 15 June 2013 - 01:36 AM, said:

Have you even read the forums? There are literally dozens of excellent, well reasoned suggestions. Maybe hundreds. For these very issues in the various threads.

That's why i have a disclaimer at the end. Please read

M e g a M a n X, on 15 June 2013 - 01:32 AM, said:

If you just did, then wait for PGI's response. Afterwards if it's stll not according to your tastes. Then do what you want afterwards. Your choice.

And most of those excellent suggestions actually come from a different set of people (sort of - they are
the ones who actually post constructive things).

It's better if the usual "complainers/disagreers" (again you know them) are the ones who make suggestions so all these complaining can go one step closer to ending

Edited by M e g a M a n X, 15 June 2013 - 01:53 AM.

[YueFei]

To me the issue isn't about whether a tactic takes skill or not. Because at some end of the scale, you'll have players with the coordination and dexterity to execute a particular tactic. And then what? If that tactic has no viable counter other than itself, then that's a broken game mechanic. But as long as a tactic has a viable counter (besides itself), it doesn't matter if that tactic is difficult to execute or extremely easy for anyone to execute, because if someone tries it, you can at least do something to counter it or mitigate it.

Imagine if Rock-Paper-Scissors were changed so that Rock beats both Paper and Scissors. Everyone will be playing Rock all the time every single time.

The game is made richer, not poorer, by having a variety of viable tactics and decisions to be made by the players.

[Satan n stuff]

Deathlike, on 14 June 2013 - 10:16 PM, said:

The sad fact is that the JJ-nerf initially affected me... but later on, I had an epiphany and it's literally a non-factor.

I've found that before the nerf I could fight on even terms with poptarts using a sniper mech without jumpjets, nowadays I can shoot them square CT on their way down before they get a shot off, screwing up their aim so much that they cant effectively fight back.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

The skill level of pilots is what will define balance in a particular match, but I don't think that is what PGI is using to balance the game.

Up until the recent balance post from Paul, I was convinced that they were using long-term data from weeks of play and thousands of individual matches about each weapon ... which ones overall are being used the most, doing the most damage, the most kills, and earning the most wins. With the tweaks coming for the Large Pulse Laser, however, I'm not so sure.

Individual matches will, by the nature of the match maker, will be only as balanced as the number and variety of players currently queued allows.

[Zylo]

Xmith, on 14 June 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

You can have the appearance of weapon balance but because of the skill level of players, the game itself can never have balanced play.

Weapons are not OP, the skill level of players makes the game appear unbalanced. Take the jump snipers for example. People shouted and cried that they were making the game unbalanced. It seems most hated jump snipers. People were full aware that there are snipers in the game. Knowing this fact, they still chose not to use cover. What were the snipers suppose do? Tell them to get back under cover before they shoot them? All this has been discussed and the snipers were basically saying what not to do if you don't what to be sniped.

That was just one example. Some recent nerfs seem to be geared toward the less skilled. In itself it seems to make sense. The devs trys to help out people so that they can have fun and enjoy the game. It's a losing cause because competitive player skill level will never happen. Especially if PGI is working toward a high player count.

One could easily argue that a player boating the most overpowered weapons could appear to be skilled.

Weapon balance is still ****** up, players boating the most powerful weapons will appear more skilled than they actually are. What you may consider skill will be considered by others to be exploiting broken game mechanics.

[Waking One]

Poptarting took skill? Lol.

[Zerberus]

Waking One, on 15 June 2013 - 03:25 AM, said:

Poptarting took skill? Lol.

What?? Push and hold 1 button, aim, pull trigger, wait 15 seconds.... isn`t that skill??

Seriously, I agree 100%. Popatring now takes a thousand times more skill than before, and is still stupid easy to do. Just earn to let go of the JJ button for a second before shooting, instead of qqing becasue your ezeeymode just got nerfed to a "mere" easymode that still only takes 2 buttons to play.