228 replies to this topic

[Dudeman3k]

First things first, this isn't targeting any type of build to be inferior, to one another, but to explain why unit A is just as good as unit B, but with over all less damage as unit B.

Example A.

A SHD with 2 ERPPC + AC5. Overall damage per match is about 270 average per match with 3-4 kills.

This build uses a fast engine (+DHS) to move around, and maximizes on pin-point damage to get the job done. with it's limited weapons you would think it wouldn't do much damage... and your right, it doesn't (compared to it being armed with all slots available), it just immediately cripples and destroys components with its pin-point advantage no matter the circumstances.

Example B.

A SHD with 2 Mlasers, 1 UAC5, 2 LRM5, 2 SSRM's, BAP. (same engine as example A)Overall damage per match is about 490 average per match with 0-1 kills.

So what gives? we ask. Well, The damage is spread out. the Mlasers and SSRMs do not provide instant gratification like ballistics or the PPC and it has a shorter range by comparison, so you can't use it at any range like Example A. Does it provide adequate close range defense?? absolutely!.. but it wont be as quickly devastating as example A's defense. As for its Mid to long range, it has its LRM's and UAC... unfortunately there are many defenses to 10 missles (ECM, AMS, Speed) so well casually discount the LRM's, leaving the UAC5 as it's only source of reliable damage. it lacks the punch of the 2 PPC + AC5, so it's a little gimped compared to Example A.

End Result.

The balanced (example build does in fact have a strong stance with it's capabilities, Short, Med, and Long ranges covered, and does well in most cases. HOWEVER, example A will have less weapons, producing less damage, yet preforms better than Example B at any range, and produces more kills. Why?? Pin-point.

High Alpha Meta will continue to exists with the pin-point mechanic. Some will argue "It takes skill to aim!" or "I like to shoot where I'm aiming".... I reply. "It will take even MORE skill to utilize multiple cross-hairs" and "You'll still be shooting where your aiming, you'll just need more skill without the pin-point crutch"...

I like blowing up specific parts of my opponent using my ability to aim.... but I would also really enjoy blowing up specific parts of my opponent using a more skillfully involved, muti-tasking, multi-fire-grouping, ability to aim. And It will allow most stock variants + balanced builds to be even more effective..... hell it might even discourage boating.

Time to get back into my 3 weaponed mech (which is all of them)

Edited by Dudeman3k, 19 October 2013 - 06:10 PM.

[MonkeyDCecil]

I agree with you. But it does not matter, PGI will never change.

[Pht]

Russ bullock has stated, by valid implication, in one of the No guts no galaxy podcasts that he does not think it is fun to have the weapons be deconverged.

Russ Bullock is the president of PGI.

Bryan ekman, the number 2, previously stated that he thinks the battlemechs are being well/properly simulated.

Until these two [things I don't agree with] are corrected, I don't see that getting a minimally proper MW video game (mech combat wise) is probable.

[SilentWolff]

gg close

[Noth]

If it's not the Alpha meta, then it will be the dps meta, or the long ranged meta, or the brawling meta. There will always be a best meta. Just because the flavor of meta is not what you like does not make it any worse than any other meta.

[Pht]

Noth, on 19 October 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

If it's not the Alpha meta, then it will be the dps meta, or the long ranged meta, or the brawling meta. There will always be a best meta. Just because the flavor of meta is not what you like does not make it any worse than any other meta.

Here's a thought ... how about having a 'meta' that matches the lore?

It's entirely possible and actually desirable.

[jakucha]

Pht, on 19 October 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

Here's a thought ... how about having a 'meta' that matches the lore?

It's entirely possible and actually desirable.

It isn't that simple. All mechwarrior games have had big flaws in multiplayer modes one way or another

[Noth]

Pht, on 19 October 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

Here's a thought ... how about having a 'meta' that matches the lore?

It's entirely possible and actually desirable.

You mean TT? Lore and stories varied widely in how effective mechs and weapons are. TT does not translate well at all to real time. The heat system is ripped almost directly from TT (Except we shut down the instant we reach our cap and yes TT has a variable cap before even reaching the heat penalties).

There can be no meta that matches lore or the TT simply from the fact that TT is a turn based game and lore varies too much. As long as there are competitive teams seeking the best builds, there will always bee a dominant meta. In low tierd games you actually see something closer to the lore (mixed and varied builds, super specialized builds are not super common place like in the top tier).

[Otto Cannon]

Pht, on 19 October 2013 - 04:03 PM, said:

Russ bullock has stated, by valid implication, in one of the No guts no galaxy podcasts that he does not think it is fun to have the weapons be deconverged.

I also saw a quote (from Paul iirc) saying that the lack of convergence was due to hit detection being already bad enough without it, and unable to handle extra complication. That would seem to be supported by the fact that SRMs currently have the worst hit registration with their multiple strikes.

I wonder if Russ just doesn't like to admit that a major gameplay decision causing huge problems is based on the inability of his company to handle the game engine they chose to use? I can only speculate, seeing as it's so hard to get a straight answer from PGI.

[Dudeman3k]

I understand the weapon meta changes with every band-aid change introduced.... but the Alpha-Meta has always been the issue since day one. Now you'll need to ask yourself "why".... and you already know the answer to that.

x2 Guass - Alpha Meta

x2 AC20 - Alpha meta

x6 SRM6 - Alpha Meta

x6 LL - Alpha meta

x8 ssrms - alpha meta

sway back (x9 Small laser) - alpha meta.

x6 PPC - alpha meta

Now they did changes to prevent these "issues"..... but what still remains (despite even the dreadful ghost heat?)... thats right...... ALPHA META!!!!! and we all know why.

No amount of band-**** can fix this problem.... hell they even DOUBLED armor becuase of it (and like Pht mentions, it just ruined weaker weapons like the Small Laser over all).... but that didnt change the current META!!!

The issue with this High Alpha Meta, is that it encourages Bigger weapons you can only mount on BIgger mechs.

A different meta is desperately needed, and in order to do that, they need to realize it's problem. It's not the weapons, its the way the weapons hit.

[Steel Claws]

Dudeman3k, on 19 October 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

High Alpha Meta will continue to exists with the pin-point mechanic. Some will argue "It takes skill to aim!" or "I like to shoot where I'm aiming".... I reply. "It will take even MORE skill to utilize multiple cross-hairs" and "You'll still be shooting where your aiming, you'll just need more skill without the pin-point crutch"...

I like blowing up specific parts of my opponent using my ability to aim.... but I would also really enjoy blowing up specific parts of my opponent using a more skillfully involved, muti-tasking, multi-fire-grouping, ability to aim. And It will allow most stock variants + balanced builds to be even more effective..... hell it might even discourage boating.

Time to get back into my 3 weaponed mech (which is all of them)

You do realize that the two alphas are very close to the same. You just took away weapons that you can acually aim at a given component for ones you have no control over but doesn't miss. What is surprising to me is then you sound like you want to get rid of the ability to place your shots were you want them. Then there is the slow recycle time and lower DPS of ERPPCs coupled with the much higher heat generation. With PPCs you have to cool down rather than keep shooting - hense the lower point scores. Since you are getting such low damage numbers I can only conclude that you are killing crit mechs - so the number of kills is highly misleading.

Pht, on 19 October 2013 - 05:22 PM, said:

Here's a thought ... how about having a 'meta' that matches the lore?

It's entirely possible and actually desirable.

I fail to see where aiming your shots to hit where you want them isn't in the lore. The lack of convergence in table top was put there to simulate pilot skill. After all you couldn't have someone always hitting what they were aiming at and in general you didn't say "I'm going to blow off the mechs legs". Pilot skill doesn't need to be simulated in MWO and we can choose what we aim at. If you read the books, good pilots always picked components out and destroyed what they were aiming at.

Further if shots started deverging or randomly missing you would hear a lot more screaming about HSR. Even if the shots went straight out from the mech, hitting narrow mechs like spiders would be a whole lot harder and they really don't need this help. It's part of why they are so hard to hit now since you don't get good convergence with weapons that have travel time when they are running at an angle. Instead the shots go more or less stright and you may get hits on multiple components or they may mis entirely going around he taget (something I see all too often).

[Chronojam]

MonkeyDCecil, on 19 October 2013 - 03:56 PM, said:

I agree with you. But it does not matter, PGI will never change.

Noth, on 19 October 2013 - 05:09 PM, said:

If it's not the Alpha meta, then it will be the dps meta, or the long ranged meta, or the brawling meta. There will always be a best meta. Just because the flavor of meta is not what you like does not make it any worse than any other meta.

Hey remember back in closed beta when you had snipers, and brawlers, and mediums, and fast little jerks nipping your heels and back-capping your base? All at the same time! Plus LRM boats which alternated between hilariously overpowered and just-OK. Even if they did it by accident, they had it done before.

[Steel Claws]

Dudeman3k, on 19 October 2013 - 05:46 PM, said:

I understand the weapon meta changes with every band-aid change introduced.... but the Alpha-Meta has always been the issue since day one. Now you'll need to ask yourself "why".... and you already know the answer to that.

x2 Guass - Alpha Meta

x2 AC20 - Alpha meta

x6 SRM6 - Alpha Meta

x6 LL - Alpha meta

x8 ssrms - alpha meta

sway back (x9 Small laser) - alpha meta.

x6 PPC - alpha meta

Now they did changes to prevent these "issues"..... but what still remains (despite even the dreadful ghost heat?)... thats right...... ALPHA META!!!!! and we all know why.

No amount of band-**** can fix this problem.... hell they even DOUBLED armor becuase of it (and like Pht mentions, it just ruined weaker weapons like the Small Laser over all).... but that didnt change the current META!!!

The issue with this High Alpha Meta, is that it encourages Bigger weapons you can only mount on BIgger mechs.

A different meta is desperately needed, and in order to do that, they need to realize it's problem. It's not the weapons, its the way the weapons hit.

Nothing is stopping anyone from playing without alphas. In point of fact I see someone shooting either groups or chain fire in nearly every match I play in. Every Mechwarrior game that has ever came out was in large part played out with the alpha strike. That is not to say that chains and groupm fire aren't used extensively or effectively. I use group fire much of the time and chain fire frequently. I think you'd be surprised how many are doing this, but people don't always understand what they are seeing unless it's chained LRMs or AC2/5

[Noth]

Chronojam, on 19 October 2013 - 05:57 PM, said:

Hey remember back in closed beta when you had snipers, and brawlers, and mediums, and fast little jerks nipping your heels and back-capping your base? All at the same time! Plus LRM boats which alternated between hilariously overpowered and just-OK. Even if they did it by accident, they had it done before.

Even back in beta, the top competitive player often only ran select weapons. You are looking back and only seeing what you want. It was no where near as balanced back then than it is now for the majority of the player base.

[Sephlock]

Dudeman3k, on 19 October 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

A SHD with 2 Mlasers, 1 UAC5, 2 LRM5, 3 SSRM's, BAP. (same engine as example A)Overall damage per match is about 490 average per match with 0-1 kills.

?

[Dudeman3k]

@ steel claws:

did you just say

"What is surprising to me is then you sound like you want to get rid of the ability to place your shots were you want them."

read the phrase of mine you just quoted and tell me where you got the idea: "you want to get rid of the ability to place your shots were you want them."

lol, selective reading is a bad habit Steel.

If you read it one more time, im sure you'll see, Im asking for MORE skill to aim. as in, Multiple cross-hairs, I DO want to shoot where I am aiming, I just want to have to work a bit harder than I do now. It seems like You are perfectly fine with a handicap that breaks any idea of skill involvement.

Edited by Dudeman3k, 19 October 2013 - 06:11 PM.

[Ghogiel]

I'll just roll my victor with arm mounted weapons which will always be able to converge pin point due to actuators. Elbows are OP.

[Chronojam]

Noth, on 19 October 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

Even back in beta, the top competitive player often only ran select weapons. You are looking back and only seeing what you want. It was no where near as balanced back then than it is now for the majority of the player base.

This seems incorrect because I was in charge of figuring out builds for not only my general lances but also for Run Hot or Die tournament compositions and internal bird-on-bird violence. Eventually things coalesced around 2PPC1Gauss and jumpsniping became the flavor of the year, which is when the game became less interesting.

I'm also a bit of a historian and have an established timeline of dates when various modifications were made to the game, and to weapons, and the impact it had both internally and externally. I can tell you every time LRMs were broken and how many days it took to patch and was designing builds that took advantage of it each time.

I'm sure things feel better for the majority now that trial mechs are not completely awful single-heatsink abortions. Do you remember when they gave out a Dragon that would permanently shut down in the caldera on Caustic? That was pretty funny!

[Dudeman3k]

Noth, on 19 October 2013 - 06:02 PM, said:

Even back in beta, the top competitive player often only ran select weapons. You are looking back and only seeing what you want. It was no where near as balanced back then than it is now for the majority of the player base.

this right here is even more proof that the alpha meta always has existed because of a major problem. the way everything meets at needle-tip.

Sephlock, on 19 October 2013 - 06:04 PM, said:

?

lol, fixed it, thanks

[Noth]

Dudeman3k, on 19 October 2013 - 06:08 PM, said:

this right here is even more proof that the alpha meta always has existed because of a major problem. the way everything meets at needle-tip.

If you change that you simply slip into a dps meta as it will become more important to throw out as much damage as possible compared to precision damage. While different, is really no better than the Alpha meta.

Edited by Noth, 19 October 2013 - 06:11 PM.