150 replies to this topic

[soarra]

Jaguar Prime, on 01 July 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

I've been following this thread since it started this morning. I've read every post and the thing that I can't wrap my head around is this. People run crappy builds and are happy running crappy builds. But they complain when they die and lose to good builds. (cheese as they call it.)

When they are told that their builds are crap, they point to the anecdotal evidence of doing well in that mech. That may be true relative to who you are playing and the builds they are using. But when matched up against pilots who know how to build mechs. They resort to "The opposing pilots are running cheese builds. That's why I am losing." "Hey PGI, do something about these cheese builds." "My awesome balanced setup is losing to specialized, smart, cheese builds."

Seriously, I understand playing for fun in a crazy config that you came up with. I understand that you enjoy doing it. What I don't understand is the need to complain when you lose to configs that are just plain smarter,more efficient, and just outright better. Why should superior builds and superior tactics be nerfed because certain players want to be competitive in crap.

superior builds that should not be possible to fit on a mech, with pinpoint accuracy..sigh
btw i enjoy running up to the super elite ppc stalkers and crippling them in my light

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Jaguar Prime, on 01 July 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

I've been following this thread since it started this morning. I've read every post and the thing that I can't wrap my head around is this. People run crappy builds and are happy running crappy builds. But they complain when they die and lose to good builds. (cheese as they call it.)

When they are told that their builds are crap, they point to the anecdotal evidence of doing well in that mech. That may be true relative to who you are playing and the builds they are using. But when matched up against pilots who know how to build mechs. They resort to "The opposing pilots are running cheese builds. That's why I am losing." "Hey PGI, do something about these cheese builds." "My awesome balanced setup is losing to specialized, smart, cheese builds."

Seriously, I understand playing for fun in a crazy config that you came up with. I understand that you enjoy doing it. What I don't understand is the need to complain when you lose to configs that are just plain smarter,more efficient, and just outright better. Why should superior builds and superior tactics be nerfed because certain players want to be competitive in crap.

Well there are multiple parts to this.

First things first it's human nature.

But the real question is should there be "superior builds", I'm fine with there being some what better builds. Or builds that are suited better to a role.

Right now what we have is a function of terrible balancing.

So no, people shouldn't complain when they lose to cheese, that is a decision they make not to be cheese.

But people CAN complain about the cheese being a result of a game that is poorly balanced.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 01 July 2013 - 05:11 PM.

[Hotthedd]

Jaguar Prime, on 01 July 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

I've been following this thread since it started this morning. I've read every post and the thing that I can't wrap my head around is this. People run crappy builds and are happy running crappy builds. But they complain when they die and lose to good builds. (cheese as they call it.)

When they are told that their builds are crap, they point to the anecdotal evidence of doing well in that mech. That may be true relative to who you are playing and the builds they are using. But when matched up against pilots who know how to build mechs. They resort to "The opposing pilots are running cheese builds. That's why I am losing." "Hey PGI, do something about these cheese builds." "My awesome balanced setup is losing to specialized, smart, cheese builds."

Seriously, I understand playing for fun in a crazy config that you came up with. I understand that you enjoy doing it. What I don't understand is the need to complain when you lose to configs that are just plain smarter,more efficient, and just outright better. Why should superior builds and superior tactics be nerfed because certain players want to be competitive in crap.

A build can be cheese and still be smart, I believe that was the OP's point.
The problem is one-click kills due to builds that take best advantage of a broken mechanic. If you want to be competitive at the top brackets, you HAVE to run those builds because the OpFor will be running those builds. Therefore it is smart to take those builds.

The mechanic that forces the meta needs to be addressed. Simultaneously fired multiple weapons should not all magically hit one spot. It is breaking the game. It is driving off players.

[Ansel]

Jaguar Prime, on 01 July 2013 - 05:03 PM, said:

I've been following this thread since it started this morning. I've read every post and the thing that I can't wrap my head around is this. People run crappy builds and are happy running crappy builds. But they complain when they die and lose to good builds. (cheese as they call it.)

When they are told that their builds are crap, they point to the anecdotal evidence of doing well in that mech. That may be true relative to who you are playing and the builds they are using. But when matched up against pilots who know how to build mechs. They resort to "The opposing pilots are running cheese builds. That's why I am losing." "Hey PGI, do something about these cheese builds." "My awesome balanced setup is losing to specialized, smart, cheese builds."

Seriously, I understand playing for fun in a crazy config that you came up with. I understand that you enjoy doing it. What I don't understand is the need to complain when you lose to configs that are just plain smarter,more efficient, and just outright better. Why should superior builds and superior tactics be nerfed because certain players want to be competitive in crap.

I'll just quote Sirlin for this one.


"You will not see a classic scrub throw his opponent five times in a row. But why not? What if doing so is strategically the sequence of moves that optimizes his chances of winning? Here we’ve encountered our first clash: the scrub is only willing to play to win within his own made-up mental set of rules. These rules can be staggeringly arbitrary. If you beat a scrub by throwing projectile attacks at him, keeping your distance and preventing him from getting near you—that’s cheap. If you throw him repeatedly, that’s cheap, too. We’ve covered that one. If you block for fifty seconds doing no moves, that’s cheap. Nearly anything you do that ends up making you win is a prime candidate for being called cheap. Street Fighter was just one example; I could have picked any competitive game at all."

[Trauglodyte]

Cheese builds are just those that are currently abusing, for lack of a better word, the current game play. Cheese happens in every game when something becomes OP. You either ride the wave and hope that it gets fixed or you get steam rolled and grit your teeth as it happens. Cheese isn't necessarily "smart", it is just the best option at the time based on the variables given by the game designers.

[Trauglodyte]

Btw, I find it continually ironic that people don't see what Victor is trying to say. Then again, people still don't seem to understand what boating is and why it works. You either single weapon boat (ie, all PPCs) or you efficiency boat (ie, all weapons with the same or similar ranges, same or similar velocities, same or similar cool downs). I could build a Blackjack 1X that had 4 Lrg Pulse Lasers and 4 Md Lasers and it would be considered an Efficiency Boat as both weapons range out from 270-300m and both have a total recharge duration (beam + cool down) of 4s. But if I built a Hunchback 4SP that was nothing but Md Lasers and SRMs, it might not be considered efficient or practical because the cool downs are different and you have to lead for the missiles while the lasers are hit scan. The best way to make your mech as killing efficient as possible is to group weapons that are either exactly the same or operate in a very similar fashion. Doing otherwise is purposely holding you back. Now, choosing to do so in the name of RPing, flavor, etc isn't a bad thing. You've just got to be ok with the consequences of your actions. Sadly, the idiots and skilled players alike the run around with nothing but Lrg Lasers or PPCs just make it look like cheese because there is no distinct and punishing downside to doing so. THAT is the ultimate problem.

[Sephlock]

Ansel, on 01 July 2013 - 05:15 PM, said:

I'll just quote Sirlin for this one.


"You will not see a classic scrub throw his opponent five times in a row. But why not? What if doing so is strategically the sequence of moves that optimizes his chances of winning? Here we’ve encountered our first clash: the scrub is only willing to play to win within his own made-up mental set of rules. These rules can be staggeringly arbitrary. If you beat a scrub by throwing projectile attacks at him, keeping your distance and preventing him from getting near you—that’s cheap. If you throw him repeatedly, that’s cheap, too. We’ve covered that one. If you block for fifty seconds doing no moves, that’s cheap. Nearly anything you do that ends up making you win is a prime candidate for being called cheap. Street Fighter was just one example; I could have picked any competitive game at all."

Here's a game that guy was the Lead Designer for:









---

Seriously though, there is a lot of good stuff on his site.

[Sephlock]

The Zangief one (the second one) is especially illustrative .

[Jaguar Prime]

Ansel, on 01 July 2013 - 05:15 PM, said:

I'll just quote Sirlin for this one.


"You will not see a classic scrub throw his opponent five times in a row. But why not? What if doing so is strategically the sequence of moves that optimizes his chances of winning? Here we’ve encountered our first clash: the scrub is only willing to play to win within his own made-up mental set of rules. These rules can be staggeringly arbitrary. If you beat a scrub by throwing projectile attacks at him, keeping your distance and preventing him from getting near you—that’s cheap. If you throw him repeatedly, that’s cheap, too. We’ve covered that one. If you block for fifty seconds doing no moves, that’s cheap. Nearly anything you do that ends up making you win is a prime candidate for being called cheap. Street Fighter was just one example; I could have picked any competitive game at all."

After seeing this book quoted in other threads, I think by you. I actually read it. It was very informative. I agreed with 99% of it.

[Jaguar Prime]

soarra, on 01 July 2013 - 05:07 PM, said:

superior builds that should not be possible to fit on a mech, with pinpoint accuracy..sigh
btw i enjoy running up to the super elite ppc stalkers and crippling them in my light

1. But they are possible and PGI has done nothing to change it. So why should I not use them.
2. Unless you are a super elite light pilot, you will be legged quickly and dead shortly after.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 01 July 2013 - 05:10 PM, said:

Well there are multiple parts to this.

First things first it's human nature.

But the real question is should there be "superior builds", I'm fine with there being some what better builds. Or builds that are suited better to a role.

Right now what we have is a function of terrible balancing.

So no, people shouldn't complain when they lose to cheese, that is a decision they make not to be cheese.

But people CAN complain about the cheese being a result of a game that is poorly balanced.

Most complain more about the "Cheese" than they do about game balance. Most have no clue what balance truly is in this game. They just know what they feel is unfair to them.

Hotthedd, on 01 July 2013 - 05:12 PM, said:

A build can be cheese and still be smart, I believe that was the OP's point.
The problem is one-click kills due to builds that take best advantage of a broken mechanic. If you want to be competitive at the top brackets, you HAVE to run those builds because the OpFor will be running those builds. Therefore it is smart to take those builds.

The mechanic that forces the meta needs to be addressed. Simultaneously fired multiple weapons should not all magically hit one spot. It is breaking the game. It is driving off players.

There is no such thing as a Cheese build. Only builds that certain players don't like or feels gives the opfor an advantage over them. And it's a self imposed disadvantage because they have the opportunity to take the same builds as the opfor.

Taking advantage of a broken mechanic??? I don't think so. Alpha strikes are synonymous with Mechwarrior. So how are they a broken mechanic.

Honestly, I see no problem with 3 plus of a weapon converging on the same location. It means you need to be smarter about exposing your damaged panel. Remember, a solid AC20 hit should be instant death for most lights. So how is a high alpha much different. Just my opinion on that one.



Sorry for side tracking you thread Victor.

[Victor Morson]

Don't be sorry at all, man. You've brought up a ton of points that are extremely relevant, addressing the underlying philosophies that cause most of these problems in the first place. It's been good reading!

[Hotthedd]

Jaguar Prime, on 01 July 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

Taking advantage of a broken mechanic??? I don't think so. Alpha strikes are synonymous with Mechwarrior. So how are they a broken mechanic.

Honestly, I see no problem with 3 plus of a weapon converging on the same location. It means you need to be smarter about exposing your damaged panel. Remember, a solid AC20 hit should be instant death for most lights. So how is a high alpha much different. Just my opinion on that one.

I respectfully disagree. While Alpha Striking may be canon, and even used in TT, Having all weapons converge to a single spot is not. Alpha striking was considered in canon as a last-ditch attempt at survival, with inherent risks, not the default mode of shooting. It may have been common in previous MechWarrior titles, but it was broken in those games as well. Those games were limited by the capabilities of the time, so they were accepted at the time.

I have a problem with multiple weapons hitting a single spot, as it should be VERY hard to accomplish. Instead, we have magic instant automatic convergence, regardless of distance. It makes it much too easy to point, click, and instakill a mech, even undamaged and moving from 1000 meters away. Hence the term "cheese". It is considered cheesy due to the fact that even a novice pilot can do it reasonably well, or just shoot until they get a lucky shot. Good players can do it with regularity. There is no torso twisting if the alpha strike comes from a cloaked mech 1000m away. A high alpha strike is different from an AC/20 shot in that it makes any boat able to do that kind of damage without actually having the drawbacks of equipping an AC/20.

Most importantly, it is discouraging new players from sticking with the game, and making many veteran players sick of playing "Alphawarrior Online". Pinpoint Alphas are causing the stagnant metagame.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Quote

You basically are saying "I'm purposely gimping myself, but I know in my heart of hearts that I would be better off with a synergized mech".

@Nicholas: I've tried playing with "perfect" synergy ... except for ML builds (JR7-F, HBK-4P, etc.), I have a hard time doing better with them than with what Victor calls "2nd Tier Meta".

Quote

The thing is, right here, you're saying that you know it's an inferior build but you're playing it because you want to do something different. No problem. It's not a terrible build even, really - I'd almost call what you just described as "2nd tier meta." It'll do fine in PUGs, just like the Ultra Ilya does.

@Victor: It's not that I want to do something different ... it's that I'm not as good with the high-damage/pin-point alpha builds as I am with a mech that has a balance between spread and pin-point damage (AC/20 +2x LL CTF-3D, for example ... I average about 50 more points of damage and more kills per round than with Gauss +2x PPC). My laser fire spreads a little, and I can hit my target component with the AC/20 (i.e.: RT, LT, etc.) about 50% of the time within a reasonable range.

I have no illusions about how I would perform with these mechs well-coordinated, top-tier play. In my SDR-5D, I could probably contribute ... but in a heavier mech, I'd just be a target, and not for very long.

I'm building mechs to my strengths and weaknesses, not changing the way I play to match the current meta.

We agree on something else, too ... any well-built mech (and it doesn't have to be "perfectly built" ...) should be able to compete in the hands of a skilled pilot, and right now, they can't, and that's why we're all frustrated.

Edited by Kageru Ikazuchi, 01 July 2013 - 07:08 PM.

[Jaguar Prime]

Hotthedd, on 01 July 2013 - 06:56 PM, said:

I respectfully disagree. While Alpha Striking may be canon, and even used in TT, Having all weapons converge to a single spot is not. Alpha striking was considered in canon as a last-ditch attempt at survival, with inherent risks, not the default mode of shooting. It may have been common in previous MechWarrior titles, but it was broken in those games as well. Those games were limited by the capabilities of the time, so they were accepted at the time.

I have a problem with multiple weapons hitting a single spot, as it should be VERY hard to accomplish. Instead, we have magic instant automatic convergence, regardless of distance. It makes it much too easy to point, click, and instakill a mech, even undamaged and moving from 1000 meters away. Hence the term "cheese". It is considered cheesy due to the fact that even a novice pilot can do it reasonably well, or just shoot until they get a lucky shot. Good players can do it with regularity. There is no torso twisting if the alpha strike comes from a cloaked mech 1000m away. A high alpha strike is different from an AC/20 shot in that it makes any boat able to do that kind of damage without actually having the drawbacks of equipping an AC/20.

Most importantly, it is discouraging new players from sticking with the game, and making many veteran players sick of playing "Alphawarrior Online". Pinpoint Alphas are causing the stagnant metagame.

HHR Insanity argued for a change in convergence in closed beta and early open beta. Expressing concern over what could possibly happen with alpha strikes. Guess what, it is happening now. He was right. Do I have a problem with it happening? Nope!!!

Most of the folks that complain about it are the ones using crappy builds not designed to take advantage of it. (weapon synergy) I believe in killing mechs as fast and efficient as possible. So it's rare for me to score over 600 points of damage. learning to deal with high alpha's should be part of the learning curve of this game. Just like building good mechs should be.

It all boils down to "the dumbing down of the game" to cater to the lower end of players.

[Victor Morson]

I've said before that the only way I'd deal with unfocusing convergence is if it was tied to high heat levels. That's got roots in the lore and TT game, and would make a fine balancing factor to port to this kind of game. i.e. when you get very hot, your aim becomes more erratic.

The primary reason is it leaves the convergence in the hands of the player. A player good at keeping his 'mech cool can land accurate shots, while one that cannot has trouble. It'd make people rethink designs, and adapt different play styles. "Scatter spray & pray" weapons like the LBX/10 would find good homes on hot 'mechs.

But I honestly loathe this constant cry for "convergence removal" because people can't deal with pinpoint fire. Pinpoint fire isn't the problem. The fact everyone is in an assault with the same, only-viable-gun-in-the-game weapon.

For crying out loud I keep talking about velocity and most people seem to ignore me, when buffing the velocity was literally the thing that turned the PPC from trash to Overpowered overnight. When it moved at AC/10 speeds, it was VERY subpar.

Oh yeah - one other thing on convergence. One big "training feature" that is screwing this problem up even more - and the reason I don't talk about arm/torso synergy in the OP despite it previously being a HUGE deal - is that now all you have to do is press shift to toggle Arm Lock on, and bam, instant 1:1 control over your torso with 100% accurate arm-torso lock. That feature removed a ton of skill from the game.

[Hotthedd]

Jaguar Prime, on 01 July 2013 - 08:08 PM, said:

HHR Insanity argued for a change in convergence in closed beta and early open beta. Expressing concern over what could possibly happen with alpha strikes. Guess what, it is happening now. He was right. Do I have a problem with it happening? Nope!!!

Most of the folks that complain about it are the ones using crappy builds not designed to take advantage of it. (weapon synergy) I believe in killing mechs as fast and efficient as possible. So it's rare for me to score over 600 points of damage. learning to deal with high alpha's should be part of the learning curve of this game. Just like building good mechs should be.

It all boils down to "the dumbing down of the game" to cater to the lower end of players.

The way I see it, having to aim each shot to hit one spot is harder than one click 6 hits. I see pinpoint alphas as "dumbing down the game". The lowest-end player can kill with a lucky alpha strike.

Victor Morson, on 01 July 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

I've said before that the only way I'd deal with unfocusing convergence is if it was tied to high heat levels. That's got roots in the lore and TT game, and would make a fine balancing factor to port to this kind of game. i.e. when you get very hot, your aim becomes more erratic.

The primary reason is it leaves the convergence in the hands of the player. A player good at keeping his 'mech cool can land accurate shots, while one that cannot has trouble. It'd make people rethink designs, and adapt different play styles. "Scatter spray & pray" weapons like the LBX/10 would find good homes on hot 'mechs.

But I honestly loathe this constant cry for "convergence removal" because people can't deal with pinpoint fire. Pinpoint fire isn't the problem. The fact everyone is in an assault with the same, only-viable-gun-in-the-game weapon.

For crying out loud I keep talking about velocity and most people seem to ignore me, when buffing the velocity was literally the thing that turned the PPC from trash to Overpowered overnight. When it moved at AC/10 speeds, it was VERY subpar.

Oh yeah - one other thing on convergence. One big "training feature" that is screwing this problem up even more - and the reason I don't talk about arm/torso synergy in the OP despite it previously being a HUGE deal - is that now all you have to do is press shift to toggle Arm Lock on, and bam, instant 1:1 control over your torso with 100% accurate arm-torso lock. That feature removed a ton of skill from the game.

I am not advocating randomness in any way. I like the idea of harmonics: each weapon can be set to have its convergence point on the crosshair in the mechlab. Pinpoint alphas would still be POSSIBLE, but it would require much more skill to pull off.

[Kageru Ikazuchi]

Victor Morson, on 01 July 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

...
The fact everyone is in an assault with the same, only-viable-gun-in-the-game weapon.
...
buffing the velocity was literally the thing that turned the PPC from trash to Overpowered overnight.
...
press shift to toggle Arm Lock
...

I agree with all the points above (snipped for brevity ... if I'm taking something out of context, it's not my intent).

Also: decreased heat and ballistics hit-state rewind ... all of these factors have buffed certain weapons, but especially the PPC without any increased risk.

[Matta]

Victor Morson, on 01 July 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

For crying out loud I keep talking about velocity and most people seem to ignore me, when buffing the velocity was literally the thing that turned the PPC from trash to Overpowered overnight. When it moved at AC/10 speeds, it was VERY subpar.

Partially disgree here.

In my opinion, PPCs got OP not just because of velocity. Heat decrease and HSR implementation brought it on top.

Hotthedd, on 01 July 2013 - 08:59 PM, said:

The way I see it, having to aim each shot to hit one spot is harder than one click 6 hits. I see pinpoint alphas as "dumbing down the game". The lowest-end player can kill with a lucky alpha strike.

This.

[MustrumRidcully]

I do not really support removing convergence. Convergence does a lot of good things, like being able to aim at a target without needing a seperate aiming indicator for every weapon.

I support disallowing weapons to be group-fired. Then you need to aim each weapon seperately. If you're the perfect shot, maybe you manage to hit one blow after blow at the same spot. realistically, you won't. But we don't have to go through the hassle of altering the UI so the different weapons all have a specific crosshair indicating where they are pointing at right now, or having some extra circles indicating the width of convergence error between the weapons or whatever.

---

Another topic:

There are two roles for discussing balance or power of items. The role of the designer, and the role of the player.

Many players will try to find the most powerful items for their play style and use that.

The designer's job is to ensure that all item are "reasonably" powerful and any player's choice is objectively balanced, but subjectively works best for him due to his preferred play style and innate talents.

When the designer fails, you get some players torn between playing their favorite play style, and using what is actually effective. Like "I love brawling ,but the 4 PPC Stalker is much more effective and even if I get him into a brawling situation, I end up underpowered." Or "I love brawling and my Atlas, but I can actually do more harm in a mech that could equip 2 AC/20s, even if it's 35 tons lighter".

[Trauglodyte]

Victor Morson, on 01 July 2013 - 08:38 PM, said:

I've said before that the only way I'd deal with unfocusing convergence is if it was tied to high heat levels. That's got roots in the lore and TT game, and would make a fine balancing factor to port to this kind of game. i.e. when you get very hot, your aim becomes more erratic.

The primary reason is it leaves the convergence in the hands of the player. A player good at keeping his 'mech cool can land accurate shots, while one that cannot has trouble. It'd make people rethink designs, and adapt different play styles. "Scatter spray & pray" weapons like the LBX/10 would find good homes on hot 'mechs.

But I honestly loathe this constant cry for "convergence removal" because people can't deal with pinpoint fire. Pinpoint fire isn't the problem. The fact everyone is in an assault with the same, only-viable-gun-in-the-game weapon.

For crying out loud I keep talking about velocity and most people seem to ignore me, when buffing the velocity was literally the thing that turned the PPC from trash to Overpowered overnight. When it moved at AC/10 speeds, it was VERY subpar.

Oh yeah - one other thing on convergence. One big "training feature" that is screwing this problem up even more - and the reason I don't talk about arm/torso synergy in the OP despite it previously being a HUGE deal - is that now all you have to do is press shift to toggle Arm Lock on, and bam, instant 1:1 control over your torso with 100% accurate arm-torso lock. That feature removed a ton of skill from the game.

I've been talking about adding aiming and convergence penalties tied to heat. Adding in movement penalties to convergence only would help too. I still want convergence speed added back in as it was removed a long time ago. Anyway, I don't mind pin point damage if it is only possible under the best of circumstances. But, having pin point accuracy 100% of the time despite how much damage you've taken, how fast you're rolling, or how hot you are (mind you, you're getting cooked like a baked potato in your mech the hotter you get) is rediculous.

Also, the PPC phenomenon was due to the velocity increase. The boating of PPC phenomenon was due to the heat decrease and the addition of HSR. PGI took a weapon that was very difficult to use and turned it over night into something that everyone and their brother could use with no downsides. And, if that wasn't enough, then they gave it an anti-ECM bonus, making it more desirable (at the time), and added in a heat drop by way of a cool down.

If you want to balance out the PPC, bump up the heat, drop the velocity down to the AC10 level, and institute in-game penalties for players that can't manage their resources.