179 replies to this topic

[Kin3ticX]

Marmon Rzohr, on 05 January 2014 - 03:38 AM, said:

DISCLAIMER:
This is not so much a comment on the OP, I wanted to comment on the confusing attitude demonstrated in this thread.

Its because of a few things people refuse to learn about. This will be a very unpopular opinion in this thread I suppose.

-First, the power to skill ratio(as it is in MWO): Low Power/Low Skill weapons include either excessively splashy and/or lock-on weapons with many counters. This includes LBX, LRMs, Streaks, and such.

Then, there are high power/high skill weapons and this is where you find projectile weapons like gauss rifles, PPC, and Autocannons which are more pinpoint. Lasers are a great choice at any skill level because while they are hitscan, they can be either splashy or pinpoint depending on individual skill level.

-2nd, The Meta: (pulled from wikipedia).....describes an emergent methodology that is a subset of the basic strategy necessary to play the game at a high level.

-3rd, FPS-Z: First person shooters with complex movement and combat on the Z-Axis.

-4th and last, Traditional battletech builds/Bracket builds/Mix Builds just have not panned out as high level because soo much of their payload usually includes LRMs and SRMs. For every ton you put into LRMs, that is a ton of payload you may never be able to use.

Those four things put together is why (under the current balance) there are less than two dozen good mechs or so out of 70+.

[Utilyan]

In a way its sorta wrong to expect pilots to get the level of confidence of doing their own thing over-night.
It might even be a right of passage thing, you roll with meta winner first priority. You top your list easy. Then they start to get creative.
I'm sure the concern is for folks to play like they have a soul for a change.
I think PGI should work with metas, just like champs with © should have metas with (m) or even new unique designations.
That's why we need urbanmech to crack that powergamer's will.
I think PGI should embrace the metas, And I think they are sorta dropping the ball on something they can have lot of fun with easily. There is a coolness to clone wars. For example I miss the old raven 3L. Never owned one, But I would NOW

Raven 3-L with like streaks, ecm.....some mediums..... That was very meta. They should release new variant designation names for every meta trend that pops up.

I like to play rebels and imperials. So the clones(meta,imperials) still have a place in my heart.

The once A-typical Raven 3L should have been a new variant, Same for the splat-cat, streak-cat.

Ultimately the metas are prob the actual "stock" mechs. I'm sure they can draw up a way to track the most common builds.

I think players should have fun, I feel sorry for anyone who get burnt out powergaming.

I believe the best cure for that is URBANMECH.

[Gaan Cathal]

Kin3ticX, on 05 January 2014 - 06:27 AM, said:

-First, the power to skill ratio(as it is in MWO): Low Power/Low Skill weapons include either excessively splashy and/or lock-on weapons with many counters. This includes LBX, LRMs, Streaks, and such.

Then, there are high power/high skill weapons and this is where you find projectile weapons like gauss rifles, PPC, and Autocannons which are more pinpoint. Lasers are a great choice at any skill level because while they are hitscan, they can be either splashy or pinpoint depending on individual skill level.

It's a nice theory, but you are assuming actual form follows intended function. PPCs and ACs do not have a high skill floor in the slightest. Projectile speed doesn't make target leading difficult at any effective range, bullet drop is barely a factor and near-0 heat management and x3 range falloff add to the 'ease of use' for ACs. Gauss has probably the most significant skill floor since it has a charge delay and is the only ammo weapon that significantly suffers from that constraint.

Lasers, on the other hand, don't actually reward high skill enough, though you're right in that they are at core a skill-scaling weapon, however the opportunity cost is too high. At a high enough skill to land an entire beam in a single component, the heat/weight relationship of the weapon and their enforced exposure time still makes them worse than the equivalent damage from an AC.

For what it's worth, it does certainly appear that your description is accurate to the intent of MWO's weapons. Unfortunately however, the implementation doesn't bear that out.

[Dirus Nigh]

I have to defend the competitive teams.

Competitive teams use the builds they do because they have built a game plan that works for them. They try out different builds, examine how they perform in the roles they need, then chose what works best. The teams require that their members use these builds for the same reason sports teams, and military units require uniformity.

Uniformity insures that the commanding player, and the team as a whole, know exactly what every one is using, and how it fits with in their tactical game plan. It insures a base line level of capability of the mechs used by the team.

However a good competitive unit will be open to trying new things. One of their members, new or old, would be able to present a different build and ask to test it out. If the player can prove he can use his individual build equally or better than the teams standards then maybe a change could be made.

[Mystere]

Dirus Nigh, on 05 January 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

I have to defend the competitive teams.

Competitive teams use the builds they do because they have built a game plan that works for them. They try out different builds, examine how they perform in the roles they need, then chose what works best. The teams require that their members use these builds for the same reason sports teams, and military units require uniformity.

Uniformity insures that the commanding player, and the team as a whole, know exactly what every one is using, and how it fits with in their tactical game plan. It insures a base line level of capability of the mechs used by the team.

However a good competitive unit will be open to trying new things. One of their members, new or old, would be able to present a different build and ask to test it out. If the player can prove he can use his individual build equally or better than the teams standards then maybe a change could be made.

I will just quote myself:

Mystere, on 10 November 2013 - 06:53 PM, said:

The gaming world -- very much like the real world -- is infested by a lot of "Monkey see, monkey do" types.

[Dirus Nigh]

Mystere, on 05 January 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

I will just quote myself:

Yes it is. How does this relate to my post?

[Mystere]

Dirus Nigh, on 05 January 2014 - 10:32 AM, said:

Yes it is. How does this relate to my post?

Many so-called "competitive" teams do not innovate. They only copy.

[Bishop Steiner]

Sephlock, on 05 January 2014 - 04:19 AM, said:

I was going to make a NSFW joke, but couldn't be bothered to figure out how to word it so as to get past the mods, so just use your imagination here .

Forum Onanism perchance?

[RickySpanish]

Kin3ticX, on 05 January 2014 - 06:27 AM, said:

Its because of a few things people refuse to learn about. This will be a very unpopular opinion in this thread I suppose.

-First, the power to skill ratio(as it is in MWO): Low Power/Low Skill weapons include either excessively splashy and/or lock-on weapons with many counters. This includes LBX, LRMs, Streaks, and such.

Then, there are high power/high skill weapons and this is where you find projectile weapons like gauss rifles, PPC, and Autocannons which are more pinpoint. Lasers are a great choice at any skill level because while they are hitscan, they can be either splashy or pinpoint depending on individual skill level.

-2nd, The Meta: (pulled from wikipedia).....describes an emergent methodology that is a subset of the basic strategy necessary to play the game at a high level.

-3rd, FPS-Z: First person shooters with complex movement and combat on the Z-Axis.

-4th and last, Traditional battletech builds/Bracket builds/Mix Builds just have not panned out as high level because soo much of their payload usually includes LRMs and SRMs. For every ton you put into LRMs, that is a ton of payload you may never be able to use.

Those four things put together is why (under the current balance) there are less than two dozen good mechs or so out of 70+.

Absolutely this. Blissfully ignoring the very, very obvious advantages and disadvantages of running certain builds and Mechs simply to spit in the face of the meta-game and then pronouncing yourself a particularly inventive individual doesn't fly.

The meta exists for a reason. Understanding why it exists, instead of just sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting something daft about sheeple, is crucial to being able to counter it.

[FoxNine]

RickySpanish, on 05 January 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:

Absolutely this. Blissfully ignoring the very, very obvious advantages and disadvantages of running certain builds and Mechs simply to spit in the face of the meta-game and then pronouncing yourself a particularly inventive individual doesn't fly.

The meta exists for a reason. Understanding why it exists, instead of just sticking your fingers in your ears and shouting something daft about sheeple, is crucial to being able to counter it.

THIS! +1 now we can close the conversation.

[Mystere]

RickySpanish, on 05 January 2014 - 02:37 PM, said:

The meta exists for a reason.

And that reason is called "taking the path of least resistance".

FoxNine, on 05 January 2014 - 02:56 PM, said:

THIS! +1 now we can close the conversation.

No. There was a reason why, during the Vietnam War, American soldiers demanded that the Pentagon replace their shiny new M-16s with AK-47s.

Edited by Mystere, 05 January 2014 - 03:21 PM.

[RickySpanish]

Mystere, on 05 January 2014 - 03:15 PM, said:

And that reason is called "taking the path of least resistance".




No. There was a reason why, during the Vietnam War, American soldiers demanded that the Pentagon replace their shiny new M-16s with AK-47s.

The M16's were wiretapped?

[Gaan Cathal]

Mystere, on 05 January 2014 - 03:15 PM, said:

No. There was a reason why, during the Vietnam War, American soldiers demanded that the Pentagon replace their shiny new M-16s with AK-47s.

Because the AK-47 is better. The analogy is equivalent to being asked by a commander to run a bunch of high-dps energy builds because he's run his spreadsheets and the dps is awesome and asking for your AC/poptart/etc builds back because he's missed the point that nice dps numbers don't mean {Richard Cameron} in practice.

[Serevn]

Kin3ticX, on 05 January 2014 - 06:27 AM, said:

Its because of a few things people refuse to learn about. This will be a very unpopular opinion in this thread I suppose.

-First, the power to skill ratio(as it is in MWO): Low Power/Low Skill weapons include either excessively splashy and/or lock-on weapons with many counters. This includes LBX, LRMs, Streaks, and such.

Then, there are high power/high skill weapons and this is where you find projectile weapons like gauss rifles, PPC, and Autocannons which are more pinpoint. Lasers are a great choice at any skill level because while they are hitscan, they can be either splashy or pinpoint depending on individual skill level.

I don't know where you get your info, but Autocannons are WAY easier to use than LRMs.

[CrashieJ]

Gaan Cathal, on 05 January 2014 - 06:35 PM, said:

Because the AK-47 is better. The analogy is equivalent to being asked by a commander to run a bunch of high-dps energy builds because he's run his spreadsheets and the dps is awesome and asking for your AC/poptart/etc builds back because he's missed the point that nice dps numbers don't mean {Richard Cameron} in practice.

Can you really think about if what happens in videogame balance happened historically?

April 12th 1964 , East KeinLong

Captain Johnathan Anderson
1st Air Commando Wing

I along with the rest of my "Jungle Jims" got their hands on the first couple of shipments of M16s designed to combat those pesky AK-47 meta builds used by team "C0mmun1sT" of North Vietnam, replacing our usable but non-competitive M14s we tried to use them the other day and suffered heavy casualties due to the its horrible balance and the lackluster map we were in (I mean the hitboxes for those trees are way to big and the draw distance was horrible), the Jam rate needs to be nerfed along with the AK47 being to fire way to fast and use the same ammunition we can, but we can't use their ammunition, it's not fair. From what we've heard throughout the battle were insults like "Get on my level N00B!" and "GG no RE, L2P COMPMETA" as we were decimated that day.

Buff M16s and Nerf those damn AK-47s Mr. President, They're too freaking meta.

Respectfully,
Captain Johnathan "1337N00BK1LL3r" Anderson

Edited by gavilatius, 05 January 2014 - 10:06 PM.

[Gaan Cathal]

gavilatius, on 05 January 2014 - 10:04 PM, said:

April 12th 1964 , East KeinLong

Captain Johnathan Anderson
1st Air Commando Wing

I along with the rest of my "Jungle Jims" got their hands on the first couple of shipments of M16s designed to combat those pesky AK-47 meta builds used by team "C0mmun1sT" of North Vietnam, replacing our usable but non-competitive M14s we tried to use them the other day and suffered heavy casualties due to the its horrible balance and the lackluster map we were in (I mean the hitboxes for those trees are way to big and the draw distance was horrible), the Jam rate needs to be nerfed along with the AK47 being to fire way to fast and use the same ammunition we can, but we can't use their ammunition, it's not fair. From what we've heard throughout the battle were insults like "Get on my level N00B!" and "GG no RE, L2P COMPMETA" as we were decimated that day.

Buff M16s and Nerf those damn AK-47s Mr. President, They're too freaking meta.

Respectfully,
Captain Johnathan "1337N00BK1LL3r" Anderson

Amusingly enough, that was more or less the American local-command reaction to Vietnam...

[Boldar]

I know drop commanders who say:

I want the company to be rather fast, so every Mech has to run at least 60 km/h.
I need 2 missileboats, at least 30 missiles and 5 tons of ammo.
I need one D-DC (only heavy ECM Mech at the moment, so no alternative in this case).
I need 2 fast scouts with TAG, at least one of them with ECM.
I need another ECM Mech to go with the brawlers and one faster Mech (80+) to keep the fast enemies away from the LRMs/DDC
Every Mech of more than 40 Tons needs at least one weapon to have more reach than a med laser.

That is a mix of mechs the commander wants and it leaves lots of room for the individual pilots to take whatever Mech they want.
Of course there are discussions afterwards why something went wrong or what could have gone better. Sometimes there are questions about some builds and suggestions of making them work better. But as somebody already said: there is almost always a reason for a build being the way he is. And I do not mean incompetence...

[Trauglodyte]

Mystere, on 05 January 2014 - 03:15 PM, said:

No. There was a reason why, during the Vietnam War, American soldiers demanded that the Pentagon replace their shiny new M-16s with AK-47s.

The original M-16 was demanded to be replaced by users because it was bugged to no end while the AK-47 could be dropped in concrete and still work. Though, it should be noted that the M-16, even with all of its original issues, was far more accurate at all ranges than the AK would ever be. Though, it should also be noted that any weapon that doesn't work is better at getting yourself killed than it is at killing the enemy.

Back to the original point, the meta teams run 733Cs because each mech has the same weapons with the same ranges. Uniformity allows for greater ease of tactics. Even if you slotted in some Phract 3Ds and Victors, they'd still be running PPCs and the same AC (5s, 10s, or 20s). It is very similar as to why all military members carry the same gear in their packs: If someone goes down, you can pick up their pack and know that you've got everything that you need (ie, redundancy). It doesn't matter if you're running nothing but 733Cs or a mix of 3Ds, 9 whatevers, or 733Cs. You still have the same weapons, ranges, and capabilities so tactis stay uniform.

Until the weapons change, as in makes PPCs splash and ACs fire bursts, nothing is going to change. Even if they add in weight limits, you're still going to see nothing but Jenners, Raven Lrg Laser ECM cowards (I mean snipers), AC20/Streakhawks, and PPC-AC 3Ds, Victors, and Highlanders. Nobody on the cutting edge is going to run anything without JJs, unless it has high speed and ECM, because JJs allow the ability to avoid terrain and to always have a defelade. And the instant hit, single location weapons have their power compounded by JJs - have you ever tried poptarting with lasers? It isn't easy. And LRMs, due to their high arcs, slow speeds, need for locks, and the current jump meta, aren't viable. So, why bother with anything else when what we have provides you with everythign that you need? I can puch a hole in you at many ranges and then sit in cover to cool down and avoid incoming damage. And, everyone on my team can and does the same thing which means my level of tactics is static and the chances of being overcome are marginalized.

[Bishop Steiner]

Trauglodyte, on 06 January 2014 - 09:14 AM, said:

The original M-16 was demanded to be replaced by users because it was bugged to no end while the AK-47 could be dropped in concrete and still work. Though, it should be noted that the M-16, even with all of its original issues, was far more accurate at all ranges than the AK would ever be. Though, it should also be noted that any weapon that doesn't work is better at getting yourself killed than it is at killing the enemy.

Back to the original point, the meta teams run 733Cs because each mech has the same weapons with the same ranges. Uniformity allows for greater ease of tactics. Even if you slotted in some Phract 3Ds and Victors, they'd still be running PPCs and the same AC (5s, 10s, or 20s). It is very similar as to why all military members carry the same gear in their packs: If someone goes down, you can pick up their pack and know that you've got everything that you need (ie, redundancy). It doesn't matter if you're running nothing but 733Cs or a mix of 3Ds, 9 whatevers, or 733Cs. You still have the same weapons, ranges, and capabilities so tactis stay uniform.

Until the weapons change, as in makes PPCs splash and ACs fire bursts, nothing is going to change. Even if they add in weight limits, you're still going to see nothing but Jenners, Raven Lrg Laser ECM cowards (I mean snipers), AC20/Streakhawks, and PPC-AC 3Ds, Victors, and Highlanders. Nobody on the cutting edge is going to run anything without JJs, unless it has high speed and ECM, because JJs allow the ability to avoid terrain and to always have a defelade. And the instant hit, single location weapons have their power compounded by JJs - have you ever tried poptarting with lasers? It isn't easy. And LRMs, due to their high arcs, slow speeds, need for locks, and the current jump meta, aren't viable. So, why bother with anything else when what we have provides you with everythign that you need? I can puch a hole in you at many ranges and then sit in cover to cool down and avoid incoming damage. And, everyone on my team can and does the same thing which means my level of tactics is static and the chances of being overcome are marginalized.

make PPCs splash, like they unintentionally did back in CB?

Thanks but between the heat, minimum range and laughable projectile speed, I think the poor PPC has taken enough abuse, unless the goal is to return it to uselessness, aka like in CB.

[Trauglodyte]

I'm alright with the PPC the way it is now. I do remember it splashing back even during hte first few weeks of Open Beta but it was still useful. ACs need some burst fire, though, so that they have some sort of consequence. The GR being the only physical single hit weapon is fine with its drawbacks. I figure, not being able to do any damage under 90m and paying a massive amount of heat is enough of a hinderance on the PPC.