53 replies to this topic

[DaZur]

Okay... maybe not "greatly".

I'll admit I took the red pill and have thus far accepted the premise that brawling was impossible under the present game mechanics. That said, I love to brawl and I've so missed doing it...

So last night with gritty determination, I stripped my -1X to the bone... dropped a standard 300, 5x Mlas and an AC/20... set my feet and told myself that no matter what happened I was going to brawl and brawl with Authoritah!!

So what happened?

I will admit my first 5 or so drops were not pretty... I got caught in the open one or twice and, and was given "prison love" several times by multiple participants at range.

That said, once I scrubbed my normal approach vectors and rather choose to flank using the periphery, then picking some sniping mech that was a little too separated from the sniper-blob... I would set upon them like Rosy O'donnell at an all-you-can-eat buffet.

Clearly players (particularly those electing to play the support / sniper role) were heavily front-loading their armor, because I kid you not I was almost bringing these heavies and Assaults down with a single alpha to the back with impunity.

Obviously, as soon as I downed someone they became keenly aware a fox was in the hen-house and the rest of the team would come at me with vengeance for daring to not take may shoes off as a stomped around in "their house"...

Yes, I pretty much was dispatched in short order at that point (not with at least taking one with me) AND my presence obviously was enough of a distraction to allow the rest of my team to take the fight to them in mass...

End result of my little experiment: 8 wins 5 losses - 9 - 7 kdr..

Was it a tough row? Yes... initially. That said, once I resigned to the fact that the normal vectors would not work and that I had to resign to dying for the the benefit of the team win... It actually became fun to play spoiler.

Best maps were Frozen and Canyon and worst were Alpine and Caustic for obvious reasons.

Point of this post? / T:,DR: While I can readily acknowledge it was not easy... brawling is not necessarily an impossible role in the present game mechanics... It was a fun diversion from the admittedly stale ranged offering I'd resigned to and "yes" I'll probably do it again tonight.



Disclaimer: Mileage does vary and results expressed may not be typical for all users. Please consult your physician before participating in vigorous activities and never insert pointy objects in your ear.

Edited by DaZur, 11 July 2013 - 05:39 AM.

[AvatarofWhat]

Its not so much that brawling is impossible but that you only have two(good) weapons to choose from. Medium Lasers and the Ac-20, which is what you happened to be using. Even so they are not much better then the ER-PPC at close range while losing a lot of range. So yes everyone could take mediums and AC-20s except that PPCs are gonna serve you better in alpine, caustic, and tourmaline, while being about the same on other maps.

You are still very deadly but everyone else can pick you off from a distance. Why would the average player bother with something that's going to be tougher to play? If everyone was taking mediums and ac-20s it would be better because everyone would push up with you, but for the average player(a.k.a. noob) you are just going to either die charging their firing lines by yourself or you are going to sit back bored for most of the match until you get that one opportunity to rush in at the enemy's flank.

Don't get me wrong I enjoy doing the same thing you did but competitively there is no point. Its all about challenging yourself. There needs to be some reward for the casuals taking brawler weapons. It used to be you could make up the damage you received at range with SRM's and such if you could close in but now you are just putting out the same amount of damage, but spread out over the enemy mech, with no range, and explosive ammo.

[xDeityx]

You have to understand that when competitive players say "x tactic is dead" they are being hyperbolic. In competition, anything not optimal is bad. In extremely high Elo pug games the same rule applies.

Can you equip a brawler loadout and have successful solo drops? Absolutely. Will you almost invariably do better in a PPC boat? Unfortunately. So if your goal is winning the match, brawling is not an option the higher your Elo gets. At lower Elo games a PPC boat is a crutch...it's something you don't need that helps you win easier. At higher levels of Elo it goes from being a crutch to a requirement. In that environment brawling is effectively dead.

[tenderloving]

There are two questions that need to be asked here:

Does brawling require more work or a higher skill level than sniping to achieve equal performance?

If yes,

Will sniping always outperform brawling given opponents of equal skill putting equal amounts of effort into the conflict?

If the answer to both of these is yes, then there is a problem.

Sniping should be easier than brawling in the quest for mediocrity ONLY if it starts losing ground at higher levels of skill. We're not seeing that with the current meta, and in the current loser is brawling.

There are a bunch of reasons why this is, and a bunch of possible fixes, but it's definitely a problem. I think this thread does more to expose the weakness of brawling than you intended: You tried your damndest to make it work and you achieved meh.

[DaZur]

Good responses all... I'm getting "educated".

Your responses thus far have kinda confirmed what I've long suspected... The "casual player" and the "competitive player" cannot coexist and benefit from each others company...

No condescension intended but as a casual player I have to admit my #1 driving force it to "have fun". I do this by doing things I beleive benefit the team and sheepishly please "me". It's obvious a competitive player is driven by "winning" and being competitive. I believe this is indicative of their "no-nonsense" approach to MW:O and the low tolerance in regards to imbalance and the present high-alpha meta... Not to mention the less-than flattering opinion of anyone who does not share the same competitive drive.

[tenderloving]

DaZur, on 11 July 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

Good responses all... I'm getting "educated".

Your responses thus far have kinda confirmed what I've long suspected... The "casual player" and the "competitive player" cannot coexist and benefit from each others company...

No condescension intended but as a casual player I have to admit my #1 driving force it to "have fun". I do this by doing things I beleive benefit the team and sheepishly please "me". It's obvious a competitive player is driven by "winning" and being competitive. I believe this is indicative of their "no-nonsense" approach to MW:O and the low tolerance in regards to imbalance and the present high-alpha meta... Not to mention the less-than flattering opinion of anyone who does not share the same competitive drive.

There is always going to be tension between people who play a game to win and people who play to have fun. That's why things like ELO and ranked ladders even exist.

A game like this is tricky because it's possible to "play for fun" and absolutely **** up your team's chances of winning before you even hit launch. Unless you know everyone else on both teams feels the same as you, it wrecks the game for all involved: You're mad because of the tryhards giving you crap, and the tryhards are mad because you either caused them to lose or made what could have been a challenging experience into a roflstomp.

We really needed to be able to make our own lobbies. A lot of issues would just disappear if like-minded people could guarantee they would be matched with each other/against each other following their own ideals of fun.

What we have now slams everyone together, and the the low population often forces the matchmaker into pitting elites against guys who just logged in for the first time. It's not pretty.

TLDR: Tryhards try hard, casuals don't, everybody loses.

Edited by tenderloving, 11 July 2013 - 06:20 AM.

[armyof1]

Since you're saying one alpha almost killed most assaults and heavies, I assume you're getting within the 400m range of them. So they don't even have seismic, basically the must-have module? Sounds like you managed to get the drop on mainly newbs.

[DaZur]

tenderloving, on 11 July 2013 - 05:54 AM, said:

There are two questions that need to be asked here:

Does brawling require more work or a higher skill level than sniping to achieve equal performance?

If yes,

Will sniping always outperform brawling given opponents of equal skill putting equal amounts of effort into the conflict?

If the answer to both of these is yes, then there is a problem.

Sniping should be easier than brawling in the quest for mediocrity ONLY if it starts losing ground at higher levels of skill. We're not seeing that with the current meta, and in the current loser is brawling.

There are a bunch of reasons why this is, and a bunch of possible fixes, but it's definitely a problem. I think this thread does more to expose the weakness of brawling than you intended: You tried your damndest to make it work and you achieved meh.

RE: "Meh"...

Again, I believe this is a response that is driven by casual / competitive expectations. As a casual player, if I come out on the positive side of this experiment... I'm pleased with the result. For you, your response seems to indicate that either the win/loss or th kdr was not decisive enough...

That said, I agree with your assessment of the situation and the end-result versus the effort applied. Kudos.

Edited by DaZur, 11 July 2013 - 07:17 AM.

[tenderloving]

DaZur, on 11 July 2013 - 06:21 AM, said:

"Meh"...

Again, I believe this is a response that is driven by casual / competitive expectations. As a casual player, if I come out on the positive side of this experiment... I'm pleased with the result. For you, your response seems to indicate that either the win/loss or th kdr was not decisive enough...

That said, I agree with your assessment of the situation and the end-result versus the effort applied. Kudos.

There are a lot of things in your post that support the "meh" but I don't think you're interested in hearing them.

[BillyM]

You are pleased with the result...

...but just think how pleased you would be if brawlers made up 50% of the loadouts (25% scouts, 25% ranged)?!!

THAT is what people are pushing for, making it more viable by making ranged/boating less-viable.

PPC HEAT/SPEED BACK TO PRE-BUFF NOW!

(I have put my 4ppc Phrax away and started leveling SRM/MPL centurions, I support your quest for the ultimate brawl.)

--billyM

Edited by BillyM, 11 July 2013 - 06:31 AM.

[Lugh]

tenderloving, on 11 July 2013 - 05:54 AM, said:

There are two questions that need to be asked here:

Does brawling require more work or a higher skill level than sniping to achieve equal performance?

If yes,

Will sniping always outperform brawling given opponents of equal skill putting equal amounts of effort into the conflict?

If the answer to both of these is yes, then there is a problem.

Sniping should be easier than brawling in the quest for mediocrity ONLY if it starts losing ground at higher levels of skill. We're not seeing that with the current meta, and in the current loser is brawling.

There are a bunch of reasons why this is, and a bunch of possible fixes, but it's definitely a problem. I think this thread does more to expose the weakness of brawling than you intended: You tried your damndest to make it work and you achieved meh.

No.


And no he was just above the bell curve as a single brawler in sniper heavy environment.

Concerted brawling teams do quite well.

Mixed mech setups. Single PPC, Gauss and ML / SRM setups perform very well. They can suppress on the way in and unleash hell while in close.

[xDeityx]

DaZur, on 11 July 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

Good responses all... I'm getting "educated".

Your responses thus far have kinda confirmed what I've long suspected... The "casual player" and the "competitive player" cannot coexist and benefit from each others company...

No condescension intended but as a casual player I have to admit my #1 driving force it to "have fun". I do this by doing things I beleive benefit the team and sheepishly please "me". It's obvious a competitive player is driven by "winning" and being competitive. I believe this is indicative of their "no-nonsense" approach to MW:O and the low tolerance in regards to imbalance and the present high-alpha meta... Not to mention the less-than flattering opinion of anyone who does not share the same competitive drive.

This is only true if we continue to have a wildly unbalanced game. If the game was balanced then a mixed loadout 'mech has just as much power as one that stacks the most powerful weapon(s). That's because there wouldn't be a weapon that could be deemed "most powerful" instead they would just be different weapons that have strengths and weaknesses in different situations and it would be up to the pilot to maximize the occurrence of those situations that are favorable to his loadout.

Right now PGI is screwing everyone over. There shouldn't really be a problem with having these two groups of players in the same queue especially with Elo in the mix. It's just that PGI doesn't know what balance is so we end up in this crazy situation.

[DaZur]

armyof1, on 11 July 2013 - 06:19 AM, said:

Since you're saying one alpha almost killed most assaults and heavies, I assume you're getting within the 400m range of them. So they don't even have seismic, basically the must-have module? Sounds like you managed to get the drop on mainly newbs.

I have no way to confirm or deny this...

That said, thus far in practice I typically don't see the player base set seismic trips in camp (which to me makes most sense) Mostly I see them dropped in typical vector points (high traffic) ...

Are you implying this was only achieved because I was dropping with greenies? If so... I recall at least 4 high-profile / supposedly "leet" players that would beg to differ.

[tenderloving]

I would posit that competitive gamers want to have fun just as much as casuals. However, competitive gamers have a much higher need to win, and this can temporarily replace the desire for novelty/variety.

This can only last so long. Even the most competitive of players will start to lose interest if the most competitive path is shallow and unrewarding.


To expand on Deityx's statement:
In a game like Halo, I could "play for fun" against a super elite competitive guy and he would hand my *** to me, but it wasn't because of my loadout. As my skill increased, I would be able to go toe-to-toe with him and eventually beat him 50% of the time.

In this game, I can "play for fun" against Mr. Competitive and the choices I make before the game even starts give him a massive advantage over me. I can be a BETTER PLAYER on the field than him and still lose every game. Only at some point in the future, when I am massively better than him, I can start consistently beating him with my "fun" mech. That's what's ****** up right now.

Edited by tenderloving, 11 July 2013 - 06:51 AM.

[DaZur]

tenderloving, on 11 July 2013 - 06:28 AM, said:

There are a lot of things in your post that support the "meh" but I don't think you're interested in hearing them.

TL...

I'm honestly not being hostile but speaking frankly... I agree the oil / water scenario is a real one and it definitely does affect the present game meta.. So please do, humor me... I think the more we discuss this the more plain the problem can be explained and appreciated to all.

Edited by DaZur, 11 July 2013 - 07:19 AM.

[xDeityx]

DaZur, on 11 July 2013 - 06:45 AM, said:

That said, thus far in practice I typically don't see the player base set seismic trips in camp (which to me makes most sense) Mostly I see them dropped in typical vector points (high traffic) ...

Unless I'm grossly misunderstanding, this quote is leading me to believe that you don't understand how seismic works (no offense intended, just an observation).

Seismic Sensor is a module which you fit on a module slot in your 'mech (it is NOT a consumable though). The best version of it gives you radar hacks basically. You can detect any 'mechs' movement within 400m of your 'mech. Speed and size don't matter. There's nothing to drop at a point, you just stand there and receive the information on your radar if any 'mechs are moving within 400m of you.

[armyof1]

DaZur, on 11 July 2013 - 06:45 AM, said:

I have no way to confirm or deny this...

That said, thus far in practice I typically don't see the player base set seismic trips in camp (which to me makes most sense) Mostly I see them dropped in typical vector points (high traffic) ...

Are you implying this was only achieved because I was dropping with greenies? If so... I recall at least 4 high-profile / supposedly "leet" players that would beg to differ.

Oh I'm not saying you're low Elo or anything typical like that, but frankly Elo matchmaking has been so bad recently at least I'm regularly getting all kinds of players of different experience level and skill and roll people or get rolled on a regular basis. Maybe 1 out of 7-8 matches end up somewhat even that end 8-4 or closer and actually takes more than 5-6 minutes. So I would not be surprised at all if you'd come across a couple of guys fresh out of their cadet status without seismic that are much more prone to get sneaked up on.

Edited by armyof1, 11 July 2013 - 06:53 AM.

[Ngamok]

I'm with DaZur. I still brawl on many of my builds and I do good. Yes, they all have either an AC/20 or an AC/10 and medium and large lasers. Since he mentioned his Cataphract, both my 3D and 2X have an AC/20 and depending on the chassis, either streaks, medium, or large lasers. My 4X is a zombie brawler because of the hardpoints in the head and CT. But my 1X is my all energy build, 2 PPC in the torso for sniping, 3 large lasers in the arms for brawling once I get close enough.

Even other chassis I have I don't go pack as many PPCs into them as people have been doing. I don't have Trebuchets with 2-3 PPCs, Dragons with 2-4 PPCs, or Stalkers with 4-6 PPCs. And since I don't have any Quickdraws, I wouldn't go pop 3-4 PPCs in them either.

[DaZur]

xDeityx, on 11 July 2013 - 06:49 AM, said:

Unless I'm grossly misunderstanding, this quote is leading me to believe that you don't understand how seismic works (no offense intended, just an observation).

Seismic Sensor is a module which you fit on a module slot in your 'mech (it is NOT a consumable though). The best version of it gives you radar hacks basically. You can detect any 'mechs' movement within 400m of your 'mech. Speed and size don't matter. There's nothing to drop at a point, you just stand there and receive the information on your radar if any 'mechs are moving within 400m of you.

I guess my nonclementure is confusing... should not surprise anyone.

"Usually" I see mechs with seismic camp (drop) near typical high-traffic routes, thus getting the jump on opposing team as they pass through... In my experience I rarely see them camp (drop) in the sniper blob where I would think it would benefit the team more.

Edited by DaZur, 11 July 2013 - 07:20 AM.

[xDeityx]

DaZur, on 11 July 2013 - 07:02 AM, said:

I guess my nonclementure is confusing... should not surprise anyone.

"Usually" I see mechs with seismic camp (drop) near typical high-traffic routes, thus getting the jump on opposing team as that pass through... In my experience I rarely see them camp (drop) in the sniper blob where I would think it would benefit the team more.

Oh I gotcha, yeah I was misunderstanding your terms. They might not camp near the snipers because all of the snipers have their own seismic though.