103 replies to this topic

[Sandpit]

Ok so I've been perusing the forums (I know, I know, you're thinking "That's unusual, Sand NEVER posts on the forums") and I had an epiphany

There's a LOT (too many?) of discussions about teams, 12v12, competitive builds, OP weapons, etc. There was a post in particular that made a light go off for me today. Essentially it talked about how a few points about certain builds were wrong because in "competitive" play those builds will not be viable. Although I still disagree with that statement it made me understand a unique dynamic we have going on in MWO.

First let's look at "competitive play". I think one of the fallacies of this is that only 12v12 is considered "competitive". Every game played will be competitive, especially once CW becomes implemented and every game played will have planetary ramifications.

Right now 12v12 is almost a metaverse within a metaverse. It harkens back to the leagues of old when players created their own metagame and record keeping. Player designed rules and leagues were at the heart of comabt, especially in the Btech universe. I can remember playing in various leagues in MW2, MW2 Mercs, Mech Commanders 1&2, MW3 (I didn't play MW4 in a league but played it nonetheless), and even megamek. These leagues had a competitive edge to them that the casual player didn't have to adhere to or participate in. Ahhh good times, but this reiterates my point. There was a game within the game that was entirely player driven.

This is where we are at with MWO in my opinion. Every game is played by the same mechanics but you have this entire metagame that is exclusive to 12v12. What many fail to understand is that while certain things might not be quite as effective in a high end competitive environment like that due to very tight teamwork and tactics, it's not going to be the same for those outside of that environment.

I see a lot of players saying things like "This wont' work in a 12v12" or "Good luck being "competitive" in a 12v12 with that once CW is here" What they fail to understand is that CW doesn't mean 12v12 will be the new meta. It just means there will still be that high end player driven meta within the meta.

Now I would like to say here that I am in NO way bashing 12 mans or any other premade in any way. I am merely pointing out that with two separate meta going on within the same game you need to understand that not everyone is going to play they way you do or use the same 12 man tactics and loadouts. Nor will players have to play in 12 man groups in order to be "competitive". So the next time you get ready to say something along the lines of "Good luck using that in competitive 12 mans" remember that CW is not going to force anyone in this game to play in 12 mans in order to compete in the metaverse for planetary control.

I envision more teamwork and cohesion in pugs after CW and lobbies simply because it will give you a sense of "belonging" and having a goal other than just dropping and playing for personal glory and bragging rights. I'm not saying there won't still be the malcontents the groan and moan or that there won't be players who just don't "get it" when it comes to teamwork and tactics, but I do think that it will change the face of the game in general. 12 mans will still ahve their high end meta but that won't apply to the average joe who wants to pug or play in 4 mand and such.

[Deathlike]

There's a clearly a different meta between 12-mans and just regular PUG matches (solo or premade). Some of the obvious meta (PPC+AC/UAC5s) are obvious. However, it doesn't mean LL or med lasers aren't use. It's simply not preferable unless you're in a light or a different kind of support mech.

Same concept goes with mechs and their variants. Commandos don't see the light of day in 12-mans due to design and overall toughness. Jenners (primarily), Spiders, and Ravens do show up there too... even the classic D-DC is still big in the pro-Highlander favored meta.

If you want to use other mechs, variants, and builds that are non-standard, you can go for it... but it's not usually as effective in 12-mans. In PUGing, you can get away with it and it could be a solid build. It's just that in 12-mans, many builds are minimized and become less effective due to either weaknesses or limitations.

There's no wrong answer... just a lot of bad answers sometimes.

Edited by Deathlike, 10 November 2013 - 02:46 PM.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 10 November 2013 - 02:45 PM, said:

There's a clearly a different meta between 12-mans and just regular PUG matches (solo or premade). Some of the obvious meta (PPC+AC/UAC5s) are obvious. However, it doesn't mean LL or med lasers aren't use. It's simply not preferable unless you're in a light or a different kind of support mech.

Same concept goes with mechs and their variants. Commandos don't see the light of day in 12-mans due to design and overall toughness. Jenners (primarily), Spiders, and Ravens do show up there too... even the classic D-DC is still big in the pro-Highlander favored meta.

If you want to use other mechs, variants, and builds that are non-standard, you can go for it... but it's not usually as effective in 12-mans. In PUGing, you can get away with it and it could be a solid build. It's just that in 12-mans, many builds are minimized and become less effective due to either weaknesses or limitations.

There's no wrong answer... just a lot of bad answers sometimes.

I agree completely. That was kinda my point. We have 2 games going on really. We have the highend 12 mans where you have extreme teamwork and builds that are meant to compliment the other mechs on your team. You have actual roles and niches to fill that aren't really as prevalent on the pug side. I honestly think that's where we get some of the "yadda yadda yadda is OP, broken, etc." threads. I think you'll see a huge increase in the cohesiveness of pugs once we get some lobbies and ways to converse and collaborate with others in the game.

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 10 November 2013 - 03:10 PM, said:

I agree completely. That was kinda my point. We have 2 games going on really. We have the highend 12 mans where you have extreme teamwork and builds that are meant to compliment the other mechs on your team. You have actual roles and niches to fill that aren't really as prevalent on the pug side. I honestly think that's where we get some of the "yadda yadda yadda is OP, broken, etc." threads. I think you'll see a huge increase in the cohesiveness of pugs once we get some lobbies and ways to converse and collaborate with others in the game.

I think lobbies will just rehash what we've been saying here with a neverending argument on the opinions. Things won't really change that much, outside of trying to educate people what is good and what is not...

I do feel that 12-mans gives a lot of insight to what a CW match will look like, even if CW will most likely not use the basic Assault/Conquest mechanic that we're used to. Sure they'll be labeled as "cheese" or "cookie cutter builds", but sometimes you learn a lot about how the meta ACTUALLY works instead of just speculating. People can can complain about it, but knowing what works and what doesn't... is all about the experience.

PUGs are still good for trying out "less desirable mechs" that come up, even if they are not ideal for 12-mans. If people have ever wondered why those "mediums need a buff" threads exist... it's because they are generally unused in them (although the SH is the current primary goto medium with others showing up like the Hunchback-4SP, Centurion-A, and the KTO). Of course, mech popularity is always subjective, but if you have any grasp of why a mech/variant is successful or unsuccessful in 12-mans, you'll understand why there is a preference and "mech tiers".

Then again, it's fun to go against the meta in sub-optimal mechs in PUGs. The great thing is that most of those builds still have flaws. It's just simply a waste of time in 12-mans.

[Sandpit]

Deathlike, on 10 November 2013 - 03:29 PM, said:

PUGs are still good for trying out "less desirable mechs" that come up, even if they are not ideal for 12-mans. If people have ever wondered why those "mediums need a buff" threads exist... it's because they are generally unused in them (although the SH is the current primary goto medium with others showing up like the Hunchback-4SP, Centurion-A, and the KTO). Of course, mech popularity is always subjective, but if you have any grasp of why a mech/variant is successful or unsuccessful in 12-mans, you'll understand why there is a preference and "mech tiers".

Exactly! That's what I'm talkin about. The 12 mans have a completely different meta going on. It's almost like we have two separate games being played. The main issue I see is that we can't simply balance and adjust the game exclusively for 12 mans. They have to understand there's a huge player base that never touches 12 man play.

The "casual" players play a completely different game almost. When CW gets here everyone pugs or not will have an impact on the maetaverse. If it works the way I figure it will, the 12 mans will ahve a larger impact simply because they're more of the hardcore players and play more matches in general.

I hope that makes sense for what I'm trying to say? Essentially the 12mans have their own private meta going on while puggers (both premades and solos) play a completely different meta where there isn't near the teamwork or restrictive requirements to be "successful"

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 10 November 2013 - 03:54 PM, said:

Exactly! That's what I'm talkin about. The 12 mans have a completely different meta going on. It's almost like we have two separate games being played. The main issue I see is that we can't simply balance and adjust the game exclusively for 12 mans. They have to understand there's a huge player base that never touches 12 man play.

Well, you can balance it, but you can't balance it "in the same way". There is a trickle down effect that does go on after all. If all of a sudden, MGs became OP overnight, you'll see the reflected in 12-mans. Luckily it's not at that point (MGs could stand to use a buff), and it is unlikely that MGs will become the new meta overnight just on various details alone.

Quote

The "casual" players play a completely different game almost. When CW gets here everyone pugs or not will have an impact on the maetaverse. If it works the way I figure it will, the 12 mans will ahve a larger impact simply because they're more of the hardcore players and play more matches in general.

That's what I suspect will happen. Casuals playing in CW will probably do a bit more griping than they are now, not understanding why something is working so well, outside of not doing it themselves. Copying the meta is easy... understanding the meta is hard.

Quote

I hope that makes sense for what I'm trying to say? Essentially the 12mans have their own private meta going on while puggers (both premades and solos) play a completely different meta where there isn't near the teamwork or restrictive requirements to be "successful"

You don't have to convince me, but I'm not sure the PUGging masses are convinced of it. PUG matches have a loose set of circumstances and control that don't have the same quality of play. Being a PUG commander doesn't make you a great commander for 12-mans, but you can pick up a few good ideas now and again. In 12-mans, you want to be sure people do what they are told. In PUG matches, you want to "suggest" that people should doing the basics and going in a general, useful direction. It's a very different game and should be played and managed as such.

Success in PUGs does not translate into 12-mans, and success in 12-mans does not translate into PUGs. They are very different beasts. Skills translate as much as knowledge and understanding this game. Getting people on the same page... it's a completely different game.

[Xie Belvoule]

Your mistaken Sandpit, 12v12 will be the only thing that matters in CW. They have already said merc corps will be the only ones who can own planets. They outlined that control of a planet will be determined by who wins a prearranged 12v12 match. Thus the only thing that will matter in CW is 12v12. Everyone else will be stuck pugging in a meaningless grind to push a red or blue line back and forth.

[Roadbeer]

Xie Belvoule, on 10 November 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:

Your mistaken Sandpit, 12v12 will be the only thing that matters in CW. They have already said merc corps will be the only ones who can own planets. They outlined that control of a planet will be determined by who wins a prearranged 12v12 match. Thus the only thing that will matter in CW is 12v12. Everyone else will be stuck pugging in a meaningless grind to push a red or blue line back and forth.

[Citation needed]

[Deathlike]

Xie Belvoule, on 10 November 2013 - 04:10 PM, said:

Your mistaken Sandpit, 12v12 will be the only thing that matters in CW. They have already said merc corps will be the only ones who can own planets. They outlined that control of a planet will be determined by who wins a prearranged 12v12 match. Thus the only thing that will matter in CW is 12v12. Everyone else will be stuck pugging in a meaningless grind to push a red or blue line back and forth.

TBH, I doubt the "original plan" will be done as outlined... because I don't think even PGI has this entire mechanic set in stone yet, let alone the parchment (aka the forums) that it was written in.

it's not final until we get written proof in its deployment. Things tend to change in development after all...

[Xie Belvoule]

Roadbeer, on 10 November 2013 - 04:12 PM, said:

[Citation needed]

The CW presentation at the launch party, and the post about CW Merc life.

[Roadbeer]

Xie Belvoule, on 10 November 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

The CW presentation at the launch party, and the post about CW Merc life.

In the same thread, when asked about expanding that out with the potential creation of "Loyalist units" it was said that it hadn't been considered, but could be a possibility.
As was said above, when it's implemented, I'll make a judgement about the state of the meta, until then, I'll avoid speculation and theory-crafting.

[Xie Belvoule]

Roadbeer, on 10 November 2013 - 04:33 PM, said:

In the same thread, when asked about expanding that out with the potential creation of "Loyalist units" it was said that it hadn't been considered, but could be a possibility.
As was said above, when it's implemented, I'll make a judgement about the state of the meta, until then, I'll avoid speculation and theory-crafting.

I wasn't theory-crafting, I was simply going by what PGI has said about CWs implementation. I see your point though and will reserve my judgement, however PGI's failure to provide anything substantive for launch and their lack of progress on UI 2.0 fills me only with trepidation.

[Mycrus]

Majority of games are pugs and 4-manz... Who is to say that is not the real meta?

No surprise that pgi will implement faction warfare well before merc warfare..

Don't get me wrong I actively advocate playing 12-man, but if the majority of players (in my timezone) "prefer" to 4-man, what's a merc supposed to do?!

Even the so called "units" seldom bother to drop 12s..

So yeah pugs and 4-manz is the real meta meta dawg...

[Sandpit]

Own a planet is a lot different than fighting for a planet for your faction. I really think what he meants was that as a faction or lone wolf pilot you'll be working for your faction. It makes no sense for a military soldier to "own" a planet, but their faction can. Mercs will be able to own their own planet as a perk to being and paying for a merc unit.

That's how I understood it. Loyalists and LWs will still be involved in takign over planets for their faction.

[Davers]

Sandpit, on 10 November 2013 - 02:29 PM, said:

Ok so I've been perusing the forums (I know, I know, you're thinking "That's unusual, Sand NEVER posts on the forums") and I had an epiphany

There's a LOT (too many?) of discussions about teams, 12v12, competitive builds, OP weapons, etc. There was a post in particular that made a light go off for me today. Essentially it talked about how a few points about certain builds were wrong because in "competitive" play those builds will not be viable. Although I still disagree with that statement it made me understand a unique dynamic we have going on in MWO.

First let's look at "competitive play". I think one of the fallacies of this is that only 12v12 is considered "competitive". Every game played will be competitive, especially once CW becomes implemented and every game played will have planetary ramifications.

Right now 12v12 is almost a metaverse within a metaverse. It harkens back to the leagues of old when players created their own metagame and record keeping. Player designed rules and leagues were at the heart of comabt, especially in the Btech universe. I can remember playing in various leagues in MW2, MW2 Mercs, Mech Commanders 1&2, MW3 (I didn't play MW4 in a league but played it nonetheless), and even megamek. These leagues had a competitive edge to them that the casual player didn't have to adhere to or participate in. Ahhh good times, but this reiterates my point. There was a game within the game that was entirely player driven.

This is where we are at with MWO in my opinion. Every game is played by the same mechanics but you have this entire metagame that is exclusive to 12v12. What many fail to understand is that while certain things might not be quite as effective in a high end competitive environment like that due to very tight teamwork and tactics, it's not going to be the same for those outside of that environment.

I see a lot of players saying things like "This wont' work in a 12v12" or "Good luck being "competitive" in a 12v12 with that once CW is here" What they fail to understand is that CW doesn't mean 12v12 will be the new meta. It just means there will still be that high end player driven meta within the meta.

Now I would like to say here that I am in NO way bashing 12 mans or any other premade in any way. I am merely pointing out that with two separate meta going on within the same game you need to understand that not everyone is going to play they way you do or use the same 12 man tactics and loadouts. Nor will players have to play in 12 man groups in order to be "competitive". So the next time you get ready to say something along the lines of "Good luck using that in competitive 12 mans" remember that CW is not going to force anyone in this game to play in 12 mans in order to compete in the metaverse for planetary control.

I envision more teamwork and cohesion in pugs after CW and lobbies simply because it will give you a sense of "belonging" and having a goal other than just dropping and playing for personal glory and bragging rights. I'm not saying there won't still be the malcontents the groan and moan or that there won't be players who just don't "get it" when it comes to teamwork and tactics, but I do think that it will change the face of the game in general. 12 mans will still ahve their high end meta but that won't apply to the average joe who wants to pug or play in 4 mand and such.

But with PGI's plan to expand team sizes (limited by tonnage) will this remain true? Or will pugs be facing optimized 12 (or 11) man teams again?

[MadcatX]

Roadbeer, on 10 November 2013 - 04:33 PM, said:

As was said above, when it's implemented, I'll make a judgement about the state of the meta, until then, I'll avoid speculation and theory-crafting.

Well, could you at least pretend to theory-craft? We're really running out of non-negative threads, and the negative ones we do have degraded to simply throwing around the word "fallacy" like it's going out of style.

MWO in the News: The Pcgamer review thread that will... not.... die....
Gameplay Balance: Elo sucks, ACwarrior
Maps & Modes: Capracing and "I hate map X"
Metagame: c-bill grinding
Upcomming Features: When are these features comming? Soon.
Feature Suggestions: Fix this feature!!!

the Mechs & Loadouts subforum sees less vitriol then the others, with folks actually making some interesting talk about mechs and loadouts

And the Tournaments & Events subfolder has the least griefing. There may be a correlation betweeen that and the lack of tournaments and events.

[Roland]

Garbage builds like lbx mechs are garbage even in pug matches, even if folks don't comprehend their badness.

[Davers]

Roland, on 10 November 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

Garbage builds like lbx mechs are garbage even in pug matches, even if folks don't comprehend their badness.

I figure the people who like them can't aim, so some damage is better than no damage.

[Roland]

They actually end up getting fairly high damage, albeit all spread out so dramatically less effective than that same damage done with real guns.

Like I said though. Even though they don't grasp that those weapons are bad, they are still bad.

[Sandpit]

Roland, on 10 November 2013 - 05:31 PM, said:

Garbage builds like lbx mechs are garbage even in pug matches, even if folks don't comprehend their badness.

Davers, on 10 November 2013 - 05:33 PM, said:

I figure the people who like them can't aim, so some damage is better than no damage.

Neither of which has aaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaanything to do with this thread. Come on guys, I don't want this turning into another "what's wrong with MWO" thread. Lord knows there's more than enough of those.