179 replies to this topic

[Roadbeer]

Well, since everyone else is advertising...

House Marik has the BEST space bacon in the Inner Sphere, http://www.house-mairk.net

We frequently put up "casual" and "competitive" 12 man drops, and have a wide variety of units with players in many timezones and play-styles.
I think if you were to check out almost any faction you'd find they do the same, at which point, it becomes 'flavor'.

[MeiSooHaityu]

I tend not to follow the meta, but I have from time to time.

I had a Boom-Jager for a while. Normally it was my "go-to" when I was having a bad night with my other builds. The Boom-Jager is long gone now, so I currently don't have a meta heavy build right now.

I was considering converting the K2 back to a Dual Gauss, but I think it will stay dual A/C10 for now.

[Roughneck45]

"Real pilots" can make anything work, but that doesn't change the fact that some builds are always better than others.

Sometimes they do need meta builds, like when the MM puts you up against the same people every match and they are running meta builds, unless you enjoy losing over and over because your build is inferior.

[Joseph Mallan]

Sandpit, on 10 November 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

Meta builds become popular because they're usually easy to use and follow what ever the latest FoTM is. That doesn't mean other builds are as effective in the right hands. I would actually venture to say that those NOT using the meta builds are more skilled because they do more with less.

Thank You for... NOT DRINKING THE KOOL-AID

[DEN_Ninja]

I am willing to wait till they roll out TDM/DM privates matches that allow One versus One combat. To test the real effectiveness you need to have two equally skilled players slugging it out. One with meta builds and one without.

Realistically there are so many factors to any sort of win that a 'meta' build is really negligible. An AC/40 is not worth a spit if it gets blindsided by a proper flank or rush. It is useless in a long range fight.

I mean most of the people in the thread agree that good builds are good but any half decent build can be used reliably in the hands of player who is skilled and comfortable enough to play it.

I know Edmeister is a legendary player but his overall skill at mechs other than lights could be bit better. Give him a meta build jager and he would do pretty well but I'd reckon he is much more fierce in one of his Jenners with one his loadouts. Course when he streams he is quick to admit his faults in a match which makes him all the better player.

I'd hazard a guess that a player that devotes himself to meta builds really won't have a firmer grasp on the game than person who is willing to experiment and find what is not only effective but comfortable in their hands.

[Tahribator]

Ever since I started playing MWO, I've always did the opposite of the Meta. Making something underpowered work in this game is extremely rewarding and forces you to adapt your gameplay and tactics to your weapons/mechs. It encourages experimentation and creativity which is why this game is so addicting for me. If you finally make it work, you've improved yourself in this game.

Meta builds make this game easy, "carrying" your team with a HGN-733C doesn't mean anything to me. I will not be commending you, since you only took something OP and abused a mechanic, not by player skills but just exploiting the unbalanced state of the game. Now, if you manage to take down 3 heavies in a wounded brawler and win us the round through superior knowledge of your mech and tactics, I will commend you in chat. I might even add you as a friend. You're the type of player I want to play with.

This is also why I don't play in a 12v12 and turned down every invitation from squads, because without meaningful balance and limitations 12v12 is just an arms race. Who will bring the most poptarters, who has the most tonnage?

Heck, my stream is called "The rage against the meta" usually.

[FerrolupisXIII]

as a dedicated LRM pilot, i have gone through the days of old when "LRM's are bad and you should feel bad" then through the hilarity of LRMAGEDDON and LRMAGEDDON II, where "you're taking advantage of broken mechanics and you should feel bad"

nowadays, im sitting pretty in my brand new Thunderbolt, delivering heavy fire support and suppression to the enemy. LRM pilots take every bit as much talent to be effective as the guy boating AC-5's or PPC's. i'd like to see them try and keep a lock while avoiding getting your head shot off by a Cataphract or Highlander.

THat being said, cheers for not playing with the meta. my favorite recent event was a victor with a meta build going full LEROY JENKINS status after a medium, only to be pulled into the open for me to rain LRM hell on his silly head. much RAGE was spewed about how much of a n00b i am and i should fight him 1v1. your tears make wonderful lubricant for my LRM re-loaders, kind pilot.

[Sandpit]

Tahribator, on 11 November 2013 - 09:27 AM, said:

Ever since I started playing MWO, I've always did the opposite of the Meta. Making something underpowered work in this game is extremely rewarding and forces you to adapt your gameplay and tactics to your weapons/mechs. It encourages experimentation and creativity which is why this game is so addicting for me. If you finally make it work, you've improved yourself in this game.

Meta builds make this game easy, "carrying" your team with a HGN-733C doesn't mean anything to me. I will not be commending you, since you only took something OP and abused a mechanic, not by player skills but just exploiting the unbalanced state of the game. Now, if you manage to take down 3 heavies in a wounded brawler and win us the round through superior knowledge of your mech and tactics, I will commend you in chat. I might even add you as a friend. You're the type of player I want to play with.

This is also why I don't play in a 12v12 and turned down every invitation from squads, because without meaningful balance and limitations 12v12 is just an arms race. Who will bring the most poptarters, who has the most tonnage?

Heck, my stream is called "The rage against the meta" usually.

This is why I think there are really two meta games at play here. You have the 12v12 and then everyone else. When CW gets here, every player from lonewolves to merc commanders will have an impact on planetary control. It's going to be interesting to see what happens. I think private leagues for 12mans will actually increase a bit because of the ease of being able to drop against specific groups but that won't affect the ingame meta nearly as much.

Some will use it as nothing more than a drop mechanism for their privately run leagues but will still be participating in CW by default.

[DEN_Ninja]

Sandpit, on 11 November 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:

This is why I think there are really two meta games at play here. You have the 12v12 and then everyone else. When CW gets here, every player from lonewolves to merc commanders will have an impact on planetary control. It's going to be interesting to see what happens. I think private leagues for 12mans will actually increase a bit because of the ease of being able to drop against specific groups but that won't affect the ingame meta nearly as much.

Some will use it as nothing more than a drop mechanism for their privately run leagues but will still be participating in CW by default.

Even in a 12v12 standpoint I find it has too much emphasis. There's a certain adopted strategy that if it isn't meta it isn't viable. That is stupid. Just because you can put a good pilot into a mech with some high damage alphas doesn't mean they are going to use it to their fullest potential. In fact I find it really stupid that some 12 mans force specific meta builds on their teams "just to compete". That doesn't make any sense to me. You should build your lances/companies to their strengths and not force them into it.

As I said to my brother, the way a person builds their mech should be the medium for which how well they play. It isn't and shouldn't be the way you build your mech is the way you play.

When CW rolls out I expect people to roll with more four mans in more distinctive playstyles.

Because that is when we have the advantage of know what map we get and what we ought to bring into battle. I am under the impression there will be a preemptive UI for this.

Edited by Tichorius Davion, 11 November 2013 - 10:45 AM.

[Sandpit]

Tichorius Davion, on 11 November 2013 - 10:43 AM, said:

Even in a 12v12 standpoint I find it has too much emphasis. There's a certain adopted strategy that if it isn't meta it isn't viable. That is stupid. Just because you can put a good pilot into a mech with some high damage alphas doesn't mean they are going to use it to their fullest potential. In fact I find it really stupid that some 12 mans force specific meta builds on their teams "just to compete". That doesn't make any sense to me. You should build your lances/companies to their strengths and not force them into it.

As I said to my brother, the way a person builds their mech should be the medium for which how well they play. It isn't and shouldn't be the way you build your mech is the way you play.

When CW rolls out I expect people to roll with more four mans in more distinctive playstyles.

Because that is when we have the advantage of know what map we get and what we ought to bring into battle. I am under the impression there will be a preemptive UI for this.

And THAT, my good sir, is what I'm saying. Most of the "viable" builds, weapon balances, etc. discussions and suggestions (from what i've seen and read) are built around the 12 man "competitive" portion of the game, which completely ignores that outside of a very niche section of the game, many builds and chassis are competitive

[Michael Abt]

No matter what online game, you will always find those self-proclaimed top / elite players. What they do is stacking every advantage to their favor, no matter how insignificant it is. It usually means they are good min/max'er, but it doesn't make them top players by default. Actually it is quite contrary, with everything going for them anything but a victory would be a shame.

That is also the explanation why you usually meet them only within their little fight clubs. Using Bishop's list it means that point 2 and 3 are equal, so 1, player skill, determines the outcome. Now imagine that one of those top players is beaten by a PUG, someone who is neither relying on his team nor on a cookie cutter build. They'd be the laughing stock of their fight club.

Personally, i know exactly what my playstyle is. I take a close look at what the theocrafting minmax'ers come up with, it would be ignorant not to, learn from it, adapt or modify it to suit my playstyle. It may not be best on paper how and what i play, but it is best for me.

Winning with all advantages on your side, pretty much everyone can do that, but beating the odds, that is where the gold is.

Edited by Michael Abt, 11 November 2013 - 11:33 AM.

[Sandpit]

Michael Abt, on 11 November 2013 - 11:31 AM, said:

Personally, i know exactly what my playstyle is. I take a close look at what the theocrafting minmax'ers come up with, it would be ignorant not to, learn from it, adapt or modify it to suit my playstyle. It may not be best on paper how and what i play, but it is best for me.

Same here. I look athte FotM builds so I know what I'm up against and learn tactics and strategies to counter that. Everyone says energy builds are dead and not viable but that's mostly what I run. I learned how to use those weapons under the current mechanics and go from there.

Lots of people fear the AC40 jager or complain about it. My LL boats eat them up because I know enough to stay outside of their range and just slowly pick them apart. Strategy is OP my friends

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 11 November 2013 - 11:44 AM, said:

Same here. I look athte FotM builds so I know what I'm up against and learn tactics and strategies to counter that. Everyone says energy builds are dead and not viable but that's mostly what I run. I learned how to use those weapons under the current mechanics and go from there.

Most energy builds are fine. It's just that the ERPPC took the biggest nerf. I've gotten over it (at most 1 ERPPC on any 2 PPC build).

Quote

Lots of people fear the AC40 jager or complain about it. My LL boats eat them up because I know enough to stay outside of their range and just slowly pick them apart. Strategy is OP my friends

The old whining meta, same as the new whining meta. Intelligence doesn't you further these days, but whining does. /sigh

AC20s need a different kind of nerf, but not ghost heat.

[WarHippy]

Your company should have a strategy set in place on how they want to fight, and the company commander gives roll assignments to individual players or lances based on whatever your groups criteria is. How one configures their mech to fulfill the roll they are given should be up to the individual pilot in my opinion. But what do I know? I'm just a lowly pug player with nobody to answer too.

[panicbutton]

I wish you best of luck in finding a unit that doesn't put restrictions on player's builds, but your 11k drop experience only holds so far as public matches go. There are different strategies (other than flavor of the month) which will work well and win games, but they will always require people to play certain builds.

Every single strategy, composition, 'mech, and play style has an "optimum". To be properly "competitive" you have to optimize. "Real pilots" are good in everything, but pilots held equal, a bad 'mech build for a brawler, sniper, poptart, or support will always produce lower numbers or worse results than a good 'mech build for the same role (seems obvious to me really). The better pilots will, obviously, be able to do more damage using a more successful battlemech design.

The statement that you don't need to run the flavor of the month to be a good pilot is fine, but you will undoubtedly need to conform to a certain build (square peg into square hole) in order to better complement the drop deck. Good pilots will be able to adapt to any build put in front of them and wring damage out of it, but pilots who are unable to do so will be left behind in the competitive world.

Many pilots specialize, and this is fine. You cannot be expected to excel at every single 'mech chassis or role, but you can be expected to fill in where necessary and give it a shot. Good players and good natured players can play something outside of their comfort zone to back up their team if needed. It is much better to have someone in an unfamiliar chassis than to have a chassis that doesn't make sense in the team. Players cross the line into "not a good team player" when their attitude is the unfortunately common "I can't" or "I won't".

Edited by panicbutton, 11 November 2013 - 03:03 PM.

[Sandpit]

panicbutton, on 11 November 2013 - 01:47 PM, said:

I wish you best of luck in finding a unit that doesn't put restrictions on player's builds, but your 11k drop experience only holds so far as public matches go. There are ways, yes, of finding a different way to play the game, but they will always require people to play certain builds. Every single strategy, composition, 'mech, and play style has an "optimum". To be properly "competitive" you have to optimize. "Real pilots" are good in everything, but a bad 'mech build will always produce lower numbers or worse results than a good 'mech build (seems obvious to me really). The good pilots will, obviously, be able to do more damage in better 'mechs. The statement that you don't to run the flavor of the month to be a good pilot is fine, but when you want to win matches, running the FotM is the easiest route to go. Good pilots will be able to adapt to any build put in front of them and wring damage out of it, but pilots who are unable to do so will be left behind in the competitive world.

Not running a completely munched out cookie cutter FotM build doesn't equate to a "bad" build though. Sure there are builds that just don't work well but those are usually, in my experience, builds that try to do too many things. I generally build around one big weapon and then go from there.

[ManusDei]

Sorry PanicButton but you are mistaken. I have played with 6 previous groups 11,000 drops are not all pug matches. Matter of fact it wasn't until I joined your group that forced me to start playing in pug drops more than any other time because your non inclusive policy of bringing meta builds to the 12 man drops. My point is you will continue to lose unless you start to think differently about how to approach competitive play. Meta builds are are only a start not the be all of end all to 12 man competitive drops.

[Michael Abt]

Taking Bishop's list into consideration once more, what is better? Working with a fixed "2" (good tactics) and develop "3" (effective builds) around it, or vice versa, having effective builds and develop your tactics around what you've got?

Your answer tells what type of player you are, and that is the only truth about it.

[panicbutton]

ManusDei, on 11 November 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

My point is you will continue to lose unless you start to think differently about how to approach competitive play.

Currently my unit, the 228th IBR, is performing relatively well.
http://4x.reddit.com...gs_as_of_11513/

We have won the last 8 of our 9 competitive matches. I have a good handle on what it takes to win games. If you want to win, it takes some sacrifice in terms of "having fun" or "playing what you want".

Please check facts. The builds we run for Marik civial war are far from "Meta-builds". What you mean by "meta" is "optimized". You are more than welcome to tweak the builds developed for certain drop-decks, but running something which is completely different from the drop commander's deck isn't going to win games. I'm not inclined to take you into 12-man drops if you have a bad attitude about trying new things. I really don't have to. I have 30 something other extremely active unit members who really enjoy winning matches and playing competitive 12 mans.

I appreciate your conviction and enthusiasm, but I must disagree with your viewpoint. Thanks for your time in the 228th supplementing our casual player pool, and I wish you the best of luck on finding a team that suites your play style!

Have a nice day,
Captain Panicbutton 228th Independant Battlemech Regiment

P.S. I cleared up my previous post a bit.

Edited by panicbutton, 11 November 2013 - 03:28 PM.

[DrSlamastika]

What is META BUILD???