185 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

PanchoTortilla, on 04 November 2013 - 04:47 PM, said:

What he said ^^.

Plus you earn the most C-bills, mech XP and general XP by doing lots of damage, killing stuff, killing stuff that is about to kill your teammates, and blowing stuff off enemy mechs. You don't earn $@!$# for capping points, spotting enemies, narcing things, or distracting enemies.

So basically the game only rewards 1 role in the game: doing lots of damage, blowing parts off enemy mechs, and making them die. Assaults and heavies are the best at this, so it's no wonder why 75% of the team is usually composed of those types of mechs.

That's a bit of a hyperbole. The game rewards spotting, damage, capping, component destruction (which a lot of times is actually easier to do with an MG loaded squirrel), kills, victory for capping, victory for destruction of all opponents.

This is also where you have people more worried about getting an extra 20k c-bills every match instead of winning or being a cohesive team. You can do all the damage in teh world in other mechs as well. if you have a 12 v 12 and all mechs are mediums how is a 12 v 12 of all assaults going to earn you any more for destruction? You earn the same regardless of what class of mech you're in.

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 04 November 2013 - 05:11 PM, said:

That's a bit of a hyperbole. The game rewards spotting, damage, capping, component destruction (which a lot of times is actually easier to do with an MG loaded squirrel), kills, victory for capping, victory for destruction of all opponents.

Spotting doesn't happen often enough, and isn't well rewarded since the light mech is most optimal for this, but has the least armor to survive on its own w/o a distraction.

Damage is more limited on a light, due to weapon options... not that they can't deal damage, but it takes a lot more effort and time vs bigger mechs.

Capping is definitely not rewarded on Conquest. Sitting on a cap point requires more mechs to speed up the process and it's worse on Assault for those that already hate the CapWarrior.

Component destruction gains are OK but still meh in the overall reward scheme of things.

Getting an Assist is ironically worth more than a kill in this game, since the effort to collect an Assist is much easier relatively speaking... especially in conjunction with a Savior Kill.

Most of these bonuses are combat related. The few that are non-combat (generally capping)... good luck with that.

Quote

This is also where you have people more worried about getting an extra 20k c-bills every match instead of winning or being a cohesive team. You can do all the damage in teh world in other mechs as well. if you have a 12 v 12 and all mechs are mediums how is a 12 v 12 of all assaults going to earn you any more for destruction? You earn the same regardless of what class of mech you're in.

I don't aim for collecting like that, but it works out that way that even a brief hit on a target is literally 6500 C-bills when complete destruction is possible. It's ironically easier in a light due to mobility+accessibility. However having long range weaponry (just to poke) is the most beneficial alternative to collect.

Knowing how to "collect" in this game is a sad science.

[Davers]

Red squirrel, on 03 November 2013 - 02:03 PM, said:

That is true. The Jenner is legged with one AC20 hit to the left leg and most Jagers I encounter use XL engines which makes them extremely vulnerable. So one Hunchback would get obliterated in the massive firepower of the 5AC2 / 4AC5 / dual Gauss JagerMech and the other Hunchback would ripp it's side torso apart and win the game for team Hunchy.


PS: I especially like the increased torso twist which allows you to aim at 360° with your arm mounted lazors.

The Jenner has 32 leg armor, and all lights know to max it. Jenner shrugs off AC/20 hit to leg. Jagermech probably has a 50/10 split armor to the side torso, so unless the Hunchback is flanking it will need more than 2 alphas to destroy that Jager's torso, so to finish your example: Jager kills Hunchback 1. Jenner and Jager disarm Hunchback 2's AC/20 and then kill it before it can do significant damage to either.

If medium mechs perform as well across all spectrums of gameplay as you say, then why are heavies and assaults the preeminent classes? You would think with their cheaper buy-in that mediums would be the number one played class.

[YueFei]

DaZur, on 04 November 2013 - 07:44 AM, said:

Sadly... for most folk running around with the biggest gun is a lot more fun that learning how to be productive with the the middling ones.

We are a dying breed my friend...

You shouldn't have the mistaken impression that Medium mech pilots want buffs just because they are dying and/or losing matches. I win more games than I lose, and have a positive KDR, and I spend most of my time in a Hunchback.

I don't believe Medium mechs should receive buffs, because I don't think they are necessary and I also don't think buffs will help them.

Playing sneaky is not the sole province of Lights and Mediums. Smart pilots can do the same thing in Heavies and Assaults. My issue right now is that for a given weapons payload, a Heavy carries it with more armor than a comparably-built Medium, for a marginal difference in speed. I've already given an example earlier in this thread with the AC/20 Hunchback vs the AC/20 Cataphract. That speed difference is not tactically significant. But it could darn well be strategically significant, if only the maps were larger and there were more mission objectives.

I don't advocate for buffs for Mediums, and I don't advocate for nerfs for Heavies and Assaults. What I do advocate for are larger maps and more creative and immersive mission objectives.

Edited by YueFei, 04 November 2013 - 10:05 PM.

[sokitumi]

Davers, on 04 November 2013 - 07:08 PM, said:

If medium mechs perform as well across all spectrums of gameplay as you say, then why are heavies and assaults the preeminent classes? You would think with their cheaper buy-in that mediums would be the number one played class.

Is this your first mechwarrior game? Not trying to be insulting.

[Hexenhammer]

I wonder how fun the game will be when and if weight limits are imposed.

Me: I want to play an assault!
Match Making: wait time to play play assaults is 10 minutes. While you wait here's another sale.

[ShinVector]

Wispsy, on 31 October 2013 - 09:18 PM, said:

Assaults are the strongest mechs in the game. Is it surprising that more people want to play them? I have been some nights when I am not run in my light playing 6+ games with no lights and no more then 2 mediums on my team in a row. Think how badly it is going to be if tonnage limit matchmaking comes into solo queue. The assault queue going to be very very long compared to the rest. I mean high Elo games already take years to find and are almost all assault mechs.... Inc 4 hour wait times!!!

Uhhh.. Not sure if someone already said it. The draft plan tonnage limits is going to put an end to ALL lights and ALL Assault teams because of the min and max tonnage limit.
I am guessing probably only an ALL medium team will be possible but everything thing else will have to be a mix.
There will not be all assault mech teams like you mentioned.

[Samziel]

It's not really that bad when playing lights. It has a greater possibility of having a great fight, where you can just run around everyone ignoring you while you destroy every assault who thinks you can do nothing against their might.

Bwahaaha getting 600+ damage every match that happends :DD

Edited by Samziel, 04 November 2013 - 11:50 PM.

[Wispsy]

ShinVector, on 04 November 2013 - 10:29 PM, said:

Uhhh.. Not sure if someone already said it. The draft plan tonnage limits is going to put an end to ALL lights and ALL Assault teams because of the min and max tonnage limit.
I am guessing probably only an ALL medium team will be possible but everything thing else will have to be a mix.
There will not be all assault mech teams like you mentioned.

Which is why it will be 4 hour wait times...think about it, at top Elo almost everybody plays assaults. Wait times can already be over an hour during most of the day if you are trying to drop solo. If it is looking to not only find games relatively close in Elo (and relatively is not really that close in this game and it still struggles) whilst finding enough mediums and lights to make a game happen? lol...always wanted a game that would only let me play twice a week...oh wait...

And saying that it will be fine because people will play mediums....peoples mediums are not high enough to get in those kinds of games. Not to mention that when highly competitive players lose, they will want to win, best way to win ton up, oh look, suddenly everybody at the top is queueing as an assault again and nobody can get a match because it wants at least 4+ mediums/lights per game. The person who drops down, then gets **** on, because they are in a medium and mediums always get **** on in high Elo games, and tons back up again wanting to win...


game should be balanced without the need to force people into bad roles. I am not against tonnage limits, it is fine to stop the full light(well I do not really see this happen but I guess it must) or full assault teams at the very ends of the spectrum from happening (because too much of one thing should be bad) but I do not like the idea of forcing people who want to play into mechs that will get **** on just to find a game, like a game of patience, whoever holds out the longest wins.

Also consider this, what happens if you go "oh well tonnage limits make everything balanced and I cannot get a game in my highlander so I will just drop down into a light and it will all be ok" then you get matched with Elo balancing assaults (as in, they are there so the game happens, pilots who are not as experienced and need to be carried). On the other team, a 4man competitive team waited just that little bit longer then you, and they get Elo balancing mediums whilst their 4man highlander/3d team DESTROYS THE HELL out of your bad Atlas water flanking maneuver. BALANCED RIGHT. 4 lights/mediums can do nothing at all to 4heavies/assaults unless they are outskilled by a stupid amount or just wander off into a corner doing nothing and wait for their base to get totally capped.



Edit: Also consider this from a new players perspective. If your group is limited in how much it can weigh, and you just made a friend and you are both in your new assault mechs which you used all your cadet bonus to buy....oh look...one of you has to jump in a trial mech for another 75 matches if you actually want to play together....totally fair :/

Edited by Wispsy, 05 November 2013 - 07:38 AM.

[Dawnstealer]

On the upside, taking down all these arm-locked Champion Atlas RSes piloted by new players is a lot of fun.

[Screech]

Hexenhammer, on 04 November 2013 - 10:06 PM, said:

I wonder how fun the game will be when and if weight limits are imposed.

Me: I want to play an assault!
Match Making: wait time to play play assaults is 10 minutes. While you wait here's another sale.

Tonnage limits only affect groups. There will be no wait times for classes but it's a nice boogeyman to conjure up.

[Wispsy]

Screech, on 05 November 2013 - 07:48 AM, said:

Tonnage limits only affect groups. There will be no wait times for classes but it's a nice boogeyman to conjure up.

That will not stop full assault drops then or make mediums any better...just makes people play solo more in a team game if they want to win...

[Drakenn]

I disagree with this. In my shadowhawk I average about 400 dmg a game, and have had quite a few matches over 1000. it's all about how you pilot each 'mech.. I prefer medium/heavys, rarely play assaults anymore. That's just me, though.

Edited by Drakenn, 05 November 2013 - 08:04 AM.

[Screech]

Wispsy, on 05 November 2013 - 07:53 AM, said:

That will not stop full assault drops then or make mediums any better...just makes people play solo more in a team game if they want to win...

I am not sure where I said it would. I find it odd that you of all folks would equate assault=win.

If they want to make people solo less they need to make a real reason to group. Also tonnage limits will most likely remove group limits so I highly doubt you will see some mass exodus to solo dropping to run assaults. But if they do, I just can't get concerned about facing an all pug all assault match.

[HammerMaster]

Fix?
How about repair and rearm? my $0.02.

[Mister Blastman]

PGI sadly makes way more money catering to a Assault-heavy meta.

[Hellcat420]

ProtoKyle, on 31 October 2013 - 08:40 PM, said:

I don't know why the weight matching has been so sub-par lately, but nearly every game I have played tonight has 7+ assaults in it. Ruins the fun, ruins the strategy. Someone really should bring that number down to about 4 max, so it's not a shitstorm of derp every game.

ill agree to this if you pilot only a locust and no other mech from now on.

[Sandpit]

Let me sum this up:

But I don't like assaults so YOU should be limited in how YOU play the game because I don't like it.

Try and justify, wordplay, or spin it any way you want. You are trying to tell other players they can't pilot what they want because you think something else would be more fun.

[YueFei]

Sandpit, on 05 November 2013 - 09:04 AM, said:

Let me sum this up:

But I don't like assaults so YOU should be limited in how YOU play the game because I don't like it.

Try and justify, wordplay, or spin it any way you want. You are trying to tell other players they can't pilot what they want because you think something else would be more fun.

And this is why I don't want tonnage limits, or weight class mandatory minimums / maximums.

If people want to bring 12 Assault mechs they should be able to choose to do so. It's just gonna be suboptimal.

The idea here is to design the game in such a way that a good drop deck should feature representation of a variety of weights. Not to have it so that a top-heavy team with a smattering of Light mechs is the best way to go in almost every map.

NFL offenses don't resort to putting in their jumbo package on every single down. They do it sometimes for short yardage situations. In that same vein, MWO needs to feature different maps and game modes where the mission requirements dictate what you should bring. No tonnage restrictions, no weight class restrictions. Just a simple, straight-forward, "here is the map, here is the mission, you go figure out how to accomplish it."

And ideally, just like in the NFL, there are a wide variety of "formations" (drop decks) for different situations, and a variety of "plays" that can come out of a given formation.

[Sandpit]

this is where I disagree. You just stated why we DO need tonnage limits. There are certain situations where it is completely ludicrous to drop with a slow plodding 100 ton assault mech. Scouting and recon missions come to mind right off the bat. The same scenario you just laid out works both ways. You don't always put your jumbo set out there. There are certain situations where having a slow moving assault mech shouldn't be allowed.

Tonnage limits on their own are not going to be what does it. It has to b comprehensive. Example:

Recon mission: 12 mechs in the recon team and all must have a minimum speed of 80/kph and weigh no more than 70 tons. That places tonnage limits on a specific mission type where speed, stealth, and mobility are far more important than armor and firepower. The mission objective could easily be "Must hold lock on a specific item located at the enemy encampment for xx amount of seconds and return to your base with the intel"

There's a huge difference in what I just suggested as "There's too many assaults, they should be limited because I don't like seeing that many assaults. Other players should have to play to and cater to how I want to play the game." Do you see the difference and understand what I'm getting at?

if you really want to see an example of how this type of system works check out megamek and the mekwars campaign some time. Their mission types determine weight, speeds, types, etc. of mechs that are allowed. If you want to drop in assault class mechs all day long that's fine but you aren't going to do certain mission types with that composition