242 replies to this topic

[Victor Morson]

MnDragon, on 14 August 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

[sarcasm]
<set phasers=Troll>
If OP="Victor" Then infinite loop
PPC+Gauss=Baawwwz
N00b=all else
Display (0,0) Color=128764 “I am Victor, I am MWO GAWD, Listen to me puny N00bs, so it is written, so shall it be done."
/end
[/sarcasm] A summarization of the last nine pages of your tripe.

I'm still looking forward to posting the video of our match-up, provided your unit wants to defend your point / does not want to be embarrassed. Unlike every single person thus far I have challenged to defend their POV, I am more than willing to put my money where my mouth is on this issue.

I am posting peer-reviewed facts, not personal opinions, even if people don't like that fact.

Edited by Victor Morson, 14 August 2013 - 04:27 PM.

[Royalewithcheese]

MnDragon, on 14 August 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

While you are focusing on my buddies’ Atlai, I have snuck around you, blown off your Rear CT armor with an AC20, and fired 5x MG at your innards destroying you in about 3 seconds. (yes, do the math, it will probably take less than that, I am being judicious.)

Please direct me to the robot that can carry AC/20 + 5xMG because I want one.

Edited by Royalewithcheese, 14 August 2013 - 04:58 PM.

[NineTails]

NM, figured it out.

Edited by NineTails, 14 August 2013 - 07:40 PM.

[MnDragon]

Royalewithcheese, on 14 August 2013 - 04:58 PM, said:

Please direct me to the robot that can carry AC/20 + 5xMG because I want one.

sorry, fat fingered the keyboard...it was supposed to be 3.

[Victor Morson]

MnDragon, on 14 August 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

Honestly Victor, If you really need me to spell out why its dumb to follow the sheep and get a PPC Gauss combo build I will give you a few examples:

• While you are poptarting in a highlander taking popshots from 700m away, my Spider buddy with ECM is sneaking around behind your lines TAGing you and launching a UAV so that I can rain LRMs on you with a LRM 90 Stalker.

Which is when our recon lance sweeps in and obliterates the Spider. Your point? UAVs are great tools but they're shot down easily and barely cause a speed bump for LRM fights. Do you really think a Spider is going to last 10 seconds trying to TAG a group of 'mechs that can kill it in one shot? Even with it's bad hit detection, that doesn't happen.



You're inexperience is showing. Badly.

MnDragon, on 14 August 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

While you are cowering in cover waiting for your weapons to cool, I have snuck around you in a lance of commandos with Cap Accelerators and win by cap before you can fire a shot.

Everyone in our group carries capture accelerators. We also have a dedicated lance to recon/counter-recon. Also LANCE OF COMMANDOS?

Oh dear lord man, I had no idea you were that misguided.

MnDragon, on 14 August 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

While you are focusing on my buddies’ Atlai, I have snuck around you, blown off your Rear CT armor with an AC20, and fired 5x MG at your innards destroying you in about 3 seconds. (yes, do the math, it will probably take less than that, I am being judicious.)

How long do you think it takes us to kill an Atlas? The average time is around 10 seconds in a brawl.

This is sounding more and more hilarious. Dear God get your unit to scrim us. If they actually use tactics like "lances of Commandos" and "MG AC/20 Jags" this will be the funniest MW:O match ever recorded.

MnDragon, on 14 August 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

These are but three ways that the Uber-elitist 12 man team of all the same build can come to a loss.

LANCES OF COMMANDOS



OUR ONLY WEAKNESS

MnDragon, on 14 August 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

There is one thing that it requires which you have poo-pooed time and time again…a team comprised of several different builds working as that…a TEAM.

Absolutely. Teams of snipers (Gauss+PPC), teams of brawlers (SRM SRM SRM), and teams of scouts (Lasers+SRM). Thus my recommended weapon sets.

MnDragon, on 14 August 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

This is a TEAM based game, not an individualistic super MWO GAWD game.

What you're not getting is:

12 x Overpowered 'mech = Overpowered Steamroll
12 x Trash 'mechs = Trash loss

MnDragon, on 14 August 2013 - 04:04 PM, said:

Teams that work together and have a variety of abilities: win. So it was proven time and again in history. But hey, what do I know, apparently I’m a n00b, with no MWO cred.

Again, if your unit is unwilling to back your claims and engage us in a scrim, just stop. I honestly almost feel bad about this because the minute you tried to break out "lances of commandos" I realized how utterly hopeless this discussion is.

The expression "put up or shut up" applies here. All of your fancy tactics are hilariously outdated, don't work at all, etc. But if you're not going to demonstrate that with us in a public setting, well, that's pretty weak and doesn't lend a lot of credibility to them.

Edited by Victor Morson, 14 August 2013 - 08:48 PM.

[NineTails]

Victor Morson, on 14 August 2013 - 08:44 PM, said:

LANCES OF COMMANDOS



OUR ONLY WEAKNESS

I'm still trying to get past his advocacy of the AC/20 + x3 MG JM6-DD.

[Drollzy]

hilarious nonetheless... great read!

[Royalewithcheese]

NineTails, on 14 August 2013 - 09:46 PM, said:

I'm still trying to get past his advocacy of the AC/20 + x3 MG JM6-DD.

Half Jagerbomb, half 6xMG Spider, all terrible

_{(I think I have my new Trolljager build.)}

[Victor Morson]

Royalewithcheese, on 14 August 2013 - 10:02 PM, said:

Half Jagerbomb, half 6xMG Spider, all terrible

_{(I think I have my new Trolljager build.)}

If I were a betting man, I bet he won't be back. It's hard to keep saying really silly stuff without willing to back it up.

It's kind of like one of those people who starts trouble with someone bigger and more dangerous than they are, refuse to engage them, and then spends the evening telling their friends about all the ways they would have owned because of (reasons).

You know, "He's lucky I didn't break out my black belt kung fu Commando lances!"

Edited by Victor Morson, 15 August 2013 - 05:38 PM.

[1453 R]

You're aware, Victor, that no matter how hard you want to step all over the First Rasalhague, it wouldn't actually prove a thing?

Watching a video of the Blazing Aces tearing up...frankly, anyone...doesn't actually do a single miniscule thing to address the needs and concerns of the new player fresh out of the gates. Yes, obviously a well-honed, highly-trained and closely interco-ordinated 12-man running WHHTCICO12M builds will do nasty, terrible and unpleasant things to people. That's why you folks use those builds, is it not?

That doesn't mean that doing so is the One True Way down here in the filth-covered wastelands of Noob Valley you have long since left behind though, eh? I seem to recall, back in the Community Town Hall and in several threads prior to this, that you and other high-level players were very much in favor of, if I may boil it down to its essence, officially and permanently shutting the rest of us up. You feel that game balance, and discussions regarding it, should only apply to the highest levels of play and that anyone not part of that level of play has no real right to an opinion on matters of balance, ne? That no matter how well-formulated our ideas, how well researched or well constructed, if we were not in fact just absolutely f***in' ****** in the cockpit, as well as part of a well-oiled League team, we had no business discussing anything remotely like game balance. Was that about right, Victor?

Well, let me turn that around on you then, man. If I have no right to an opinion on game balance, or anything pertaining to the highest levels of competition in this game, what in the hell makes you think you have the right to an opinion down at our level? Can you even remember being an average Joe at this game? Have you ever fought in anything but the highest, most lethal and bloodthirsty of Elo brackets? Your opinions are just as colored by your position in the spectrum as ours are, man. Yes, running whatever ridiculous alpha build the Leagueians are espousing as The One And Only Choice For Players Who Don't Want To Hate Themselves will probably allow a fresh rookie to do better than he otherwise might have. It might not - believe it or not, Victor, not all of us can land every single weapon we fire on the same body part, every single time, against a wildly evading target at eight hundred meters. Some of us like lasers being able to tag multiple body parts so we can get at least some fire on a heavily damaged component, rather than just hoping we get lucky next shot.

But it might. It might even let them do exceptionally well, and convince them they're better than they are. But you know what, Victor. We don't need to run those sorts of builds down here, not to have a good time. yeah, there are things that shouldn't be done, weapons that just shouldn't be used, 'Mechs that shouldn't be bought, but our list is a lot wider than yours is. You don't believe it, and at your level that disbelief is absolutely warranted, but down here in Slumland, with all the players you laugh at when you're hanging with the Aces, all the players you want to just shut up and go away so you can Talk Balance Properly with Piranha?

We like our wider list. We like still being able to play with large lasers or Ultra autocannons. We enjoy busting out the occasional LRM platform. I enjoy being able to fly my Dragons and still get work done with them, if I play it right. I may not be an oh-so-1337 League player with a high-powered hotshot unit behind me and a KDR over 10 in my unarmored Trollmando, but you know what? At this point, I'm not afraid to admit that I'm kind of proud not to be.

Someone has to argue for the rest of us. Someone has to fight back when you and your pr0 buddies try and take our game away from us, like you were planning to do in the Town Hall. If I'm the one to do it - if I'm the only one who even tries - then so friggin' be it.

[Victor Morson]

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

You're aware, Victor, that no matter how hard you want to step all over the First Rasalhague, it wouldn't actually prove a thing?\

Watching a video of the Blazing Aces tearing up...frankly, anyone...doesn't actually do a single miniscule thing to address the needs and concerns of the new player fresh out of the gates. Yes, obviously a well-honed, highly-trained and closely interco-ordinated 12-man running WHHTCICO12M builds will do nasty, terrible and unpleasant things to people. That's why you folks use those builds, is it not?

It wouldn't prove everything, but it would prove MnDragon's ideas are hilariously bad and shouldn't be tried at home. That is, if his whole unit is on the same page. It'd find it kind of amusing if he's of the minority opinion there, too. I don't know them unfortunately.

It would show the builds are far, far more viable than the other options people keep bringing up, yes. Sometimes a visual demonstration is needed to make clear that AC/5 =/= Gauss.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

That doesn't mean that doing so is the One True Way down here in the filth-covered wastelands of Noob Valley you have long since left behind though, eh?

It means it is the most effective way to win. This thread is about the most effective way to win. Those things are inseparable.

There's many units that can defeat us, but all of them are operating closely to the same guidelines we are. There's a reason for that.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

I seem to recall, back in the Community Town Hall and in several threads prior to this, that you and other high-level players were very much in favor of, if I may boil it down to its essence, officially and permanently shutting the rest of us up. You feel that game balance, and discussions regarding it, should only apply to the highest levels of play and that anyone not part of that level of play has no real right to an opinion on matters of balance, ne?

Not exactly. I believe rather firmly that balance should be done by observing high-tier players for weapons balance, and casual players for ease-of-use mechanics. i.e. making it clear to newbies how to deal with LRMs so they don't have to complain a weapon that's actually not very good is overpowered would be ease-of-use mechanics, where watching the competitive players would likely tweak the weapons usefulness.

But gun balance should be observed by people who take the time to understand it, and balanced entirely around that. No good comes from balancing things around a lack of understanding.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

That no matter how well-formulated our ideas, how well researched or well constructed, if we were not in fact just absolutely f***in' ****** in the cockpit, as well as part of a well-oiled League team, we had no business discussing anything remotely like game balance. Was that about right, Victor?

To be honest, pretty much. There is a very deep irony here, however.

The casuals want to cling to certain weapons and try to claim they can work, while under this impression competitive players only want to cling to 5 weapons because we only use 5 weapons.

We want to improve the other weapons more than anyone else. I would positively be thrilled to come here on my list and say "Every gun is viable, you just need to know how to use it!" I would love to sit here and say that AC/2s are great support weapon. It'd make me incredibly happy to tell you that snipers, brawlers, flankers.. they're all viable and with room for creativity.

If I told you these things, however, I'd be lying. That is why we say "X guns work, Y guns are bad." We WANT "All guns work." But we're not going to use sub-standard weapons just "because." This thread again is not about sub-standard weapons, it is about the most effective ones. New players have a right to know what is the most effective without white noise.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

Well, let me turn that around on you then, man. If I have no right to an opinion on game balance, or anything pertaining to the highest levels of competition in this game, what in the hell makes you think you have the right to an opinion down at our level? Can you even remember being an average Joe at this game? Have you ever fought in anything but the highest, most lethal and bloodthirsty of Elo brackets? Your opinions are just as colored by your position in the spectrum as ours are, man. Yes, running whatever ridiculous alpha build the Leagueians are espousing as The One And Only Choice For Players Who Don't Want To Hate Themselves will probably allow a fresh rookie to do better than he otherwise might have. It might not - believe it or not, Victor, not all of us can land every single weapon we fire on the same body part, every single time, against a wildly evading target at eight hundred meters. Some of us like lasers being able to tag multiple body parts so we can get at least some fire on a heavily damaged component, rather than just hoping we get lucky next shot.

First off, anyone remotely competent at any PC FPS will have absolutely no problem aiming their shots in this game with PPCs almost immediately. They're incredibly simple.

Second, I'll need to restate what I said above. We want to "balance down to your level" to make the crappy guns worthwhile. That is the biggest irony about all of these balance arguments. We espouse high alpha because in MechWarrior: Online at present time high alpha is what is the most effective. If high ROF was given the stats to be highly effective as well, we'd endorse that. Same with missiles.

In fact the reason us "alpha warriors" constantly complain about it is we don't want to be alpha warriors. You know what I want to do? I want to play an LRM boat. I love playing LRM boats. I had a reason, in past games, to play LRM boats. Here, I'm gimping my whole team by playing an LRM boat in all but the rarest of circumstances.

That is why I'm frustrated with balance things. What I am not going to do is "just accept" broken weapons and use them "for fun" and then hide what works from newbies so they can "learn." This thread is for good information. I think I've helped provide that.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

But it might. It might even let them do exceptionally well, and convince them they're better than they are. But you know what, Victor. We don't need to run those sorts of builds down here, not to have a good time.

I love when I login during the morning and match make into one of those games where nobody is running good builds. I believe this is an approximate video representation of what having a well built Highlander in a casual game is like:



Instead I'd prefer a world where someone running 2 AC/5s and some medium lasers isn't horribly gimped, but a useful part of the team that's a serious threat to whatever I'm running.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

yeah, there are things that shouldn't be done, weapons that just shouldn't be used, 'Mechs that shouldn't be bought,

And if you'd stop buying bad mechs and bad weapons and endorsing them, they would probably even look at making them not bad weapons, eh?

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

but our list is a lot wider than yours is. You don't believe it, and at your level that disbelief is absolutely warranted, but down here in Slumland, with all the players you laugh at when you're hanging with the Aces, all the players you want to just shut up and go away so you can Talk Balance Properly with Piranha?

In a nutshell, no competitive multiplayer game that's even been successful has done so by taking balance advice from casuals. Again, it's simply the fact that the groups that invest way more time into working out what works, why it works, etc. are going to have far, far more information to go on.

I mean look at MnDragon's suggested builds and such. They're horrible. It's totally unproductive to try to pretend terrible equipment is somehow worthwhile because... ???

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

We like our wider list. We like still being able to play with large lasers or Ultra autocannons. We enjoy busting out the occasional LRM platform. I enjoy being able to fly my Dragons and still get work done with them, if I play it right. I may not be an oh-so-1337 League player with a high-powered hotshot unit behind me and a KDR over 10 in my unarmored Trollmando, but you know what? At this point, I'm not afraid to admit that I'm kind of proud not to be.

Again I've never said you can't take a dumb or silly gimmick build out. Even I do from time to time for kicks.

What I am saying is not to ever begin endorsing them, or trying to pretend they are anything other than dumb and silly gimmick builds, that's all they ever will be. It's frustrating that every time we desperately want to see a trash weapon like the AC/5 made useful in the competitive community so that it's a good gun for everyone, we have to contend with tons of people who have done no research other than subjective games going "Nuh-uh AC5 is OP!!!" or something equally insane. Look at what happened with LRMs!

That, again, is my argument of why competitive players should be looked to for balance first. People really, truly need to understand we cling to a tiny list because we're not given an alternative to do so and remain competitive. We want a wide list.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 05:47 PM, said:

Someone has to argue for the rest of us. Someone has to fight back when you and your pr0 buddies try and take our game away from us, like you were planning to do in the Town Hall. If I'm the one to do it - if I'm the only one who even tries - then so friggin' be it.

This is the most hilarious part of your whole argument, and again, shows your deep and total misunderstanding of everything we've ever said. We're not trying to "take your game away from you." People who have spent a lot of time pouring over this stuff and can back it up want more say because we want a better game.

We're not trying to take your crappy guns away, we're trying to make them not crappy guns!

If I had my way (not sure if you ever read any of my other threads) I would have halved AC/5 heat, raised AC/5 velocity and falloff, among major ROF increases for the AC/10, LBX/10, etc. I'd have cooled the LPLs down instead of just changing discharge.

You know what else I'd done? Upped PPC and Gauss recycle to almost double.

Really it comes down to the fact we want the same things, but some people are just flat out have spent way more time and effort into researching this stuff, and their opinions should weigh more than those who purposely refute any kind of serious investigation or pick weapons because they have neat audio/visual effects.

EDIT: The 2nd worst weapon in the game, the flamer, looks amazing. I'd love a reason to use it one day.

Edited by Victor Morson, 15 August 2013 - 06:58 PM.

[1453 R]

Quote

This is the most hilarious part of your whole argument, and again, shows your deep and total misunderstanding of everything we've ever said. We're not trying to "take your game away from you."

Salient point: yes, you are.

I recall a big deal prior to the Town Hall being something referred to as 'trickle-down' or 'top-down' balancing. Which is to say, balance the game at the highest competitive levels and the highest competitive levels only, and the rest of us can, in so many words go f*** ourselves. Because somehow, someway, somewhy, completely and utterly ignoring everything ninety-eight percent of your playerbase does, says, and wants in favor of slavish devotion to far too small a population to ever sustain the game financially is the right decision?

Yes yes, I get it. Balance it for the MWO 1% and the rest of us will enjoy a Glorious Utopia of perfect and flawless balance in every single match due to this mysterious trickle-down effect. And if we don't get it (spoilers: we won't), well, we didn't deserve a balanced game in the first place, did we Victor? Having fun in a MWO match is clearly the sole prerogative of those players both willing and able to put in the time, effort, and money to become a top-rated Leagueian if we don't, or can't, do that, then we may as well just uninstall, right?

Though...hmm. Perhaps I'm being a bit unfair. You have my acknowledgment as the first competitive player I've ever seen to recommend any sort of tracking at all in lower competitive brackets. While my right-brain is rather insulted, the logical side is grudgingly forced to agree that ease of use is likely a better sort of metric to track for lower brackets than bleeding-edge weapon balance. After all, Piranha can't completely eviscerate us lowbies if they're doing balancing and adjustment work based on EoU data as well as raw balance.

The point remains, however, that you are the first high-level player I have ever seen who suggested that the casuals you despise so very, very much have anything at all to offer the game. The solutions you and the other speakers brought up in the Town Hall for New Player Experience issues - namely, an official apparatus endorsed by PGI to try and force new players into League-run units and clans so that those units can handle training, rather than having PGI "waste time and effort on tutorials that would be better spent on game balance" - is three things:

1.) DEEPLY insulting.
2.) EXTREMELY offensive.
3.) Downright TOXIC.

It was that plan, that notion, that so many of you Town Hall Bigwigs were so pleased with, as well as the notion of elected representatives from high-level competitive units, and high-level competitive units alone, that mostly convinced me that you guys were intent on taking our game away from us.

Because. You. Are.

You and players like you, no matter what you say, what you think, are not looking out for our best interests, Victor. You don't play the game we play. If we don't fall in line, be good little cogs in the grindwheel, and dare to do anything other than find some unit or other and get screamed at over TS by some self-entitled ***** - for three hours on the hour every night, and don't you dare miss a night or I swear to God we're kicking your noobie butts out - about how bad we suck and how the hell did you miss that Spider it was only going a hundred and twenty and jumping between buildings in Frozen come on my friggin' cat could have made that shot you worthless little fu...!

Yeah. if we don't do that, then we're not really supposed to be playing MWO at all, at least by the standards of literally every high-level player I've seen so far. With the singular, notable exception of yourself. Even you, however, don't really like or desire the sorts of games we play, eh? The solo-droppers bother you, the people without voice comms dismay you, the folks who fly something other than Highlanders depress you, and I imagine you'd be just as pleased as could be if they all sorta just...went away. Failing that, getting the stupid little shunts corraled into various units' Crap Bins, where they can still pay for your game without actually having any impact or effect on it - or fun with it - and doing so with PGI's official Seal of Approval is the next best thing, hmm?

Yeah.

Don't pretend like you're some kind of noble champion for the downtrodden here, Victor. You have earned the distinction in my mind of being better than most, but that really, really isn't saying much. Any time some Leagueian tires to foist off the notion that actively ignoring the rest of us is for our own good - no, really! - all I have to do is remember...well, pretty much anything Vassago Rain has ever posted, and I go back to knowing better.

Edited by 1453 R, 15 August 2013 - 07:44 PM.

[Victor Morson]

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

Salient point: yes, you are.

I recall a big deal prior to the Town Hall being something referred to as 'trickle-down' or 'top-down' balancing. Which is to say, balance the game at the highest competitive levels and the highest competitive levels only, and the rest of us can, in so many words go f*** ourselves.

How do you make this logical leap?

By balancing amongst the highest tiers, a developer gets to see what weapons get used, which ones do not; which tactics don't work, which ones do. They can't see that if the people using them don't fully understand them.

For example, if they were to balance around the current competitive tier, you'd see a major Autocannon buff, because the AC/20 is the only one we might use! How is this a bad thing? Does anyone lose in this scenario? Is your game "taken away form you?"

To be honest I fear the reverse happening far more. Again, with LRMs. If a group that doesn't understand them complains enough, they're prone to - instead of improving the new-user experience and impart information on how to counter them - just nerf a weapon that's already on the bad side of the scale. This happens all the time, in a lot of games: Something gets popular and immediately it gets blamed without looking at the surrounding factors.

If you get the game to a point where the best players are using all the equipment, or close to it, you've reached a balance point where everyone and I mean everyone wins!

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

Because somehow, someway, somewhy, completely and utterly ignoring everything ninety-eight percent of your playerbase does, says, and wants in favor of slavish devotion to far too small a population to ever sustain the game financially is the right decision?

Quite frankly, I'd rather have people that have put a lot of time of effort into something be the ones looked at first, yes. If they had tested it that way, they'd seen how bad Gauss+PPC was for example, and just fixed it long before we had a serious problem.

Since they didn't do that, and because of folks who don't understand screaming the loudest, they got it into their heads that the 6 PPC Stalker was the problem and now we have ghost heat. Instead of the actual problems. This is a text book case of why balancing at the bottom is a train wreck.

Again the goal of this thread isn't really to discuss this stuff as much as it is giving newbies access to actually useful information on how to maximize their success.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

Yes yes, I get it. Balance it for the MWO 1% and the rest of us will enjoy a Glorious Utopia of perfect and flawless balance in every single match due to this mysterious trickle-down effect.

Prepare to have the mystery of the trickle-down effect solved!

Competitive Players: PPC+Gauss fire way too fast! Autocannons are really weak! I'd love a reason to use the NARC!
PGI: OK let's try it!
END USER: Hey my autocannons seem good! People are NARCing now? Awesome!

The only weapon that has ever been a "class divide" in MWO is LRMs, which still need a bit of work, but I think most people have adapted to fight now.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

And if we don't get it (spoilers: we won't), well, we didn't deserve a balanced game in the first place, did we Victor? Having fun in a MWO match is clearly the sole prerogative of those players both willing and able to put in the time, effort, and money to become a top-rated Leagueian if we don't, or can't, do that, then we may as well just uninstall, right?

I like how you keep saying things I've never said.

I keep repeatedly saying if you want to run a casual build, do it. It's a shame people do because it slows progress - a lot - but still.

Also the whole point of this thread is how to impart tips to play like a "high level legaurian" without devoting time, money, or anything else. It's here to give newbies access to the info they'd want if they want to maximize their effectiveness.

i.e. if someone signs up tomorrow, is interested in competitive play, this would insure they buy decent chassis and put on decent weapons. You can honestly be league quality in this game in a week or two if you're not getting misinformation constantly.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

Though...hmm. Perhaps I'm being a bit unfair. You have my acknowledgment as the first competitive player I've ever seen to recommend any sort of tracking at all in lower competitive brackets. While my right-brain is rather insulted, the logical side is grudgingly forced to agree that ease of use is likely a better sort of metric to track for lower brackets than bleeding-edge weapon balance. After all, Piranha can't completely eviscerate us lowbies if they're doing balancing and adjustment work based on EoU data as well as raw balance.

The thing is as I keep saying again, our goal is not and never has been to further damage "lowbies." All the weapons you guys cling to in defiance of the meta, we want them to join the meta!

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

The point remains, however, that you are the first high-level player I have ever seen who suggested that the casuals you despise so very, very much have anything at all to offer the game.

I do not despise casual players. I do hate getting on a team with someone who's running AC/2s and MGs, sure, but this thread is to educate. Why would I be educating new players if I hate them? Why would I be trying to help them up to a competitive level? Why do you think we're out to get you?

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

The solutions you and the other speakers brought up in the Town Hall for New Player Experience issues - namely, an official apparatus endorsed by PGI to try and force new players into League-run units and clans so that those units can handle training, rather than having PGI "waste time and effort on tutorials that would be better spent on game balance" - is three things:

1.) DEEPLY insulting.
2.) EXTREMELY offensive.
3.) Downright TOXIC.

OK, this is a flat out LIE. I never brought anything like that up at any point. Also the idea I've heard suggested was designed to help new players learn, because they are concerned PGI is not developing a tutorial in time for launch!!!!!

At the first town hall do you know what my contribution to the discussion on the new user experience was? Commenting about the horrible state of Trial 'Mechs. I think it is a terrible that they hog-tie new players in such a handicapped way and throw them into a fight. I desperately want to see that removed, and a 'mech given to people after a tutorial.

I care about the game, period, and for that we need lots of new blood. You really are going to resort to just making stuff up now to justify your hate for the people who want to "take your game?"

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

It was that plan, that notion, that so many of you Town Hall Bigwigs were so pleased with, as well as the notion of elected representatives from high-level competitive units, and high-level competitive units alone, that mostly convinced me that you guys were intent on taking our game away from us.

Because. You. Are.

You and players like you, no matter what you say, what you think, are not looking out for our best interests, Victor. You don't play the game we play. If we don't fall in line, be good little cogs in the grindwheel, and dare to do anything other than find some unit or other and get screamed at over TS by some self-entitled ***** - for three hours on the hour every night, and don't you dare miss a night or I swear to God we're kicking your noobie butts out - about how bad we suck and how the hell did you miss that Spider it was only going a hundred and twenty and jumping between buildings in Frozen come on my friggin' cat could have made that shot you worthless little fu...!

Again, they were suggesting this to help fill in a horrible, huge gap in the game right now. This wasn't some kind of bullying. My God. This is descending into tinfoil hat territory. (Again, I wasn't even present at the recent townhall!)

I think the train is starting to come off the rails at this point, man. This is really getting ridiculous. This thread exists to help train newbies to what presently works in the game. This is for players of all skill levels, and all interests. They aren't obligated to use the knowledge.

How this comes down to me plotting to take your game away from you (By nerfing the weapons I currently use and am practiced with and buffing ones that many casual players enjoy greatly, no less) is beyond me. You have literally every intention of the competitive community entirely backwards.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

Yeah. if we don't do that, then we're not really supposed to be playing MWO at all, at least by the standards of literally every high-level player I've seen so far. With the singular, notable exception of yourself. Even you, however, don't really like or desire the sorts of games we play, eh? The solo-droppers bother you, the people without voice comms dismay you, the folks who fly something other than Highlanders depress you, and I imagine you'd be just as pleased as could be if they all sorta just...went away.

Again, I don't want anyone to go away. I want VOIP added to the game to give pubs coms. I've said so since closed beta as I've felt it's important. Solo droppers don't bother me, but if I can help them improve their 'mechs and play style, then I'm happy to.

Yes, I groan if someone takes an Awesome and is serious about it because it's basically hurting the whole team in the process. I doubly groan if it's mounting ERs. Again, that player likely has heard all kinds of white noise and if I can help them catch on to how to dominate the game faster, well, that's the point of a guide!


This is usable by anyone. I'm not forcing you to play daily?? I have no idea where this is even coming from.

1453 R, on 15 August 2013 - 07:41 PM, said:

Failing that, getting the stupid little shunts corraled into various units' Crap Bins, where they can still pay for your game without actually having any impact or effect on it - or fun with it - and doing so with PGI's official Seal of Approval is the next best thing, hmm?

Yeah.

Don't pretend like you're some kind of noble champion for the downtrodden here, Victor. You have earned the distinction in my mind of being better than most, but that really, really isn't saying much. Any time some Leagueian tires to foist off the notion that actively ignoring the rest of us is for our own good - no, really! - all I have to do is remember...well, pretty much anything Vassago Rain has ever posted, and I go back to knowing better.

So.. uh.. you don't want our sniper meta nerfed and all the mid-close range weapons improved? That'd be ruining your game? Whaaaat?

This thread is for newbies or casuals to learn what the competitive players use, that will give them an edge. It's a guide to that end. I stand by everything said within. If everyone followed this advice, the general threat level of the game would go up a lot, to be honest.

We encourage people to play with the best weapons and gear, sure, but our larger complaint is that we want more weapons and gear to be good!

This is all that's coming to mind right now.

Edited by Victor Morson, 15 August 2013 - 08:26 PM.

[Roland]

Quote

Which is to say, balance the game at the highest competitive levels and the highest competitive levels only, and the rest of us can, in so many words go f*** ourselves.

No dude, you are just letting your inferiority complex get the better of you.

If the game is balanced for the highest levels of play, THEN IT IS BALANCED.

The difference between the most competitive players and new players, in addition to simple skill, is an understanding of how the game works. Those who have the best understanding of the game's fundamental mechanisms are best able to exploit any cracks in the foundation of the game balance. They will expose imbalance in the game.

You cannot balance based on new players who don't understand how the game works, because their behavior in game is not based upon the game mechanics themselves. Their usage is based upon, instead, an incomplete understanding of the game. Thus, balancing for their usage is impossible. Their understanding will increase over time, and the balance changes you made for them previously will no longer work.

As an example, the LBX 10 is a terrible weapon. New players will use it, because it sounds cool, and it results in high damage numbers. But its actual effectiveness on the field is much less transparent to the user. Its inherent inferiority compared to other weapons stems from the requirement of focused, precision damage in mechwarrior. This is fairly unique amongst shooters, at least to the degree you see it in this game. It's not something that many new players fully grasp. That it's not good enough to simply shoot the enemy. You need to shoot a specific location on that enemy. That is how you kill mechs.

At low levels of play, where most players are inherently inaccurate with every weapon, this failure of the LBX10 may become somewhat muted. And, as previously stated, it may even go unnoticed. You'll see people saying, "I got a few hundred damage! That's good!"

But eventually, as they get better, they will start playing against other players who are better. Then, the LBX10's failures will become more and more pronounced. Eventually, they will be forced to abandon that weapon, because it is terrible. Eventually, they will realize this, and move on to the better weapons. Both because they understand why the LBX10 is terrible, and because its terribleness results in them getting gutted by better players.

If instead, you balance the LBX10 such that people at higher levels of play ACTUALLY USE IT, then guess what? The guy at the bottom of the Elo ladder will ALSO be able to use it. It won't actually hurt him to have that weapon not suck so bad.

There seems to be this totally misguided belief on your part that somehow the "good players" want to ruin it for you. They don't. If you make the weapons more balanced, such that at high level play you see a variety, then that means the weapons are balanced... which means that at every level of play, you can use a variety of weapons.

And frankly, the population is low enough that you aren't gonna be able to play around in the low Elo range alone anyway. You have vets being put in games with guys who have obviously never played before. So if you bring the garbage weapons, and they don't get buffed up, then you are gonna get wrecked.

Honestly, I cannot possibly fathom your reasoning for wanting to keep those bad weapons bad. I honestly do not understand why you are afraid to make those weapons, which you apparently use, better.

[StaIker]

This is the trouble with forums. An expert can prove their status to other experts simply by their shared understanding, but they can never prove their status to the ignorant, for they lack the understanding needed to recognise what is truth.

[Carcass23]

*reads OP* *thinks* Umm... *reads on*
*scrolls past Victors next post*

....and the next... and the next.... and the next... seriously.

Nearly, anytime anyone tells you in absolutes that x is better than y. They're full of it. How good a weapon is based completely on your style of play. The AC5 is a fine weapon in certain circumstances, it DOES generate less heat, especially when coupled with another AC5 or hell, even an AC2 it can be downright potent. The gauss is HIGHLY overrated, the reload is mind numbingly slow and yes, it blows up. Doesn't do you much good when its lying in several pieces. Does it? The UAC5 simply jams, hard to slay your opponent when your gun doesn't fire. Other than that, its great. I still prefer 2 AC5's, no jamming.. low heat and continual damage. PPCs are fine, the ECM counter is a nice plus. Again, slow to shoot. Not as accurate as other weapons. Also, I've seen spiders with a single ERLL destroy teams, how? Staying hidden, moving fast and playing smart. Its not which weapon is better, its how you use it.

All of these arguments about .. this mech is better than that mech, how could you possibly play that mech are just plain insulting. Some people use these chassis to move up the xp tiers, simply put. Are all of the chassis great? Not really, but can they all be fun? You bet.

I will continue to scroll past any walls of quotes and nonsense replies to them, because that's all they really are. Stop talking down to the new players and start being constructive.

[StaIker]

Quote

How good a weapon is based completely on your style of play

Unfortunately this sentiment is quite wrong despite being widely held among the non-elite players. If a persons play style does not reveal the inherant strengths and weakness in each weapon, that is, the person lacks the total skill level required to have a full understanding of the whole range of weapons, that does not somehow make bad weapons into less bad weapons. It just means that the particular player is not yet good enough to tell the difference between the bad and the good. Their lower skill level means they cannot get the best of the most useful weapons, an effect which tricks the player into a false understanding of relative strengths. Because I promise you that the top players will absolutely stomp on anyone else in an equal setting, even when using bad weapons. It's not that they cannot use them, they just recognise that they are objectively inferior choices.

Edited by StaIker, 15 August 2013 - 11:29 PM.

[Victor Morson]

Carcass23, on 15 August 2013 - 11:01 PM, said:

*reads OP* *thinks* Umm... *reads on*
*scrolls past Victors next post*

....and the next... and the next.... and the next... seriously.

Nearly, anytime anyone tells you in absolutes that x is better than y.

M16s are superior to M1 Carbines are superior to Muskets. An i7 is superior to a 486 is superior to an 8086. The Gauss is superior to the AC/5.

These things are just facts.

Carcass23, on 15 August 2013 - 11:01 PM, said:

...words...

They are bad guns. I wish they were good guns, but they are not. The good guns will trash a build with bad guns every single time. Just a reality. I would be happy - very happy - to shrink the list of bad guns, as soon as I'm given a reason.

For now, again, this thread isn't for "fun builds you betchya" it is for builds that will perform well against the very best and for players interested in that information.

[ImABaer]

Carcass23, on 15 August 2013 - 11:01 PM, said:

*reads OP* *thinks* Umm... *reads on*
*scrolls past Victors next post*

....and the next... and the next.... and the next... seriously.

Nearly, anytime anyone tells you in absolutes that x is better than y. They're full of it. How good a weapon is based completely on your style of play. The AC5 is a fine weapon in certain circumstances, it DOES generate less heat, especially when coupled with another AC5 or hell, even an AC2 it can be downright potent. The gauss is HIGHLY overrated, the reload is mind numbingly slow and yes, it blows up. Doesn't do you much good when its lying in several pieces. Does it? The UAC5 simply jams, hard to slay your opponent when your gun doesn't fire. Other than that, its great. I still prefer 2 AC5's, no jamming.. low heat and continual damage. PPCs are fine, the ECM counter is a nice plus. Again, slow to shoot. Not as accurate as other weapons. Also, I've seen spiders with a single ERLL destroy teams, how? Staying hidden, moving fast and playing smart. Its not which weapon is better, its how you use it.

All of these arguments about .. this mech is better than that mech, how could you possibly play that mech are just plain insulting. Some people use these chassis to move up the xp tiers, simply put. Are all of the chassis great? Not really, but can they all be fun? You bet.

I will continue to scroll past any walls of quotes and nonsense replies to them, because that's all they really are. Stop talking down to the new players and start being constructive.

Response to this, and to people in general whose arguments runs down to "this weapon doesn't suck because you can do well with it."

If you're talking competitive play, there are superior choices in just about any game. Game designers aren't omniscient, and imbalances occur in any non-mirror match game. People who claim otherwise and believe their games are inherently balanced because it should be so are deluding themselves, because, reasons. (Granted, people who talk about "metagames" and "top tiers" cause self-perpetuation towards the same trends they're claiming are prevalent, and tend to limit experimetation and innovation, and in a smaller community like in MWO's, where the competitive scene is relatively tiny, that sort of self-perpetuation will be felt even more strongly.)

But at the end of the day, you can feel and see the difference between weapons. They're statted out. If you've ever outfitted a mech with ER LLAS and compared it to regular LLAS, LLAS wins; the ER LLAS is basically broken as a functional weapon. There is a clear winner in this case. If you follow that assumption, is it so unbelieveable that someone with way more experience than you has basically seen the same trend for different weapons?

This list is not saying "in a pug match you can never wreck face with the weapons provided here." It's saying that there are alternatives out there that obviate the need for those weapons to exist if straight up optimization is your goal. This is a point a lot of people are missing. If there was a 1 heat weapon that did 50 damage instantly, and there was a 0 heat weapon that did 50 damage instantly, and all other factors were equal, the first weapon would be on the list. Why? There's an alternative out there that's better in every way, so why bother with a weapon that even generates 1 heat? Just because you can find success with a weapon, it doesn't change its relative ranking with other, stronger choices.

The one basic assumption of this list is that focus fire is a superior tactic. It's one that can be argued with, but not one that should be. The entire armor system in this game is intended to mitigate random damage. The counter for bypassing that is stripping the armor as efficiently as possible to cause functional damage, and the route to that is focusing on one region.

Edited by ImABaer, 15 August 2013 - 11:55 PM.

[Carcass23]

See how superior your i7 is to my 8086 after your machine has been shot by a musket.