155 replies to this topic

[KharnZor]

I refuse to submit to any meta for any reason.
The 1 honorable bone in my body that's left wont allow it.

[Taemien]

sokitumi, on 23 November 2013 - 10:32 AM, said:

All true.. but isn't that kinda what betas should be used for? And what you're saying is basically that team awesome can't really evaluate their own game outside of data collecting tools. And you're probably right about that, sad as it is. All math no kung-fu..

Except for the fact that this community, or rather the gaming community overall, doesn't participate in a betas properly. Rather than actually going in to test things, using things, abusing things, and overall just playing in every crazy way possible to see where the bugs are, they instead play it like its a release.

Then complain when things are imbalanced on release.

As for what Fupdup said in his OP, yes, thats about how you have to do it. You can't say LRM5s are OP when only 2% of people are even using them. You can't get medium pulse lasers buffed when they see an appearance in just about every match.

But I do want to warn you all before you undertake this. Just because you think something is OP and you state 'abusing' it. PGI may still not change it. ECM is a good example. Some of you are quoting that it got nerfed because it was abused. How was it nerfed? It still blocks streaks. The only 'nerf' it got was a hardpoint slot restriction, and a silly BAP counter.. that really one could argue wasn't a hit on ECM but a buff to BAP to make it useful for most light mechs.

Remember, ultimately they will change their game how they see fit. If everyone starts using medium lasers and they decide thats how they want MWO to be, it will stay that way. The only true fire way to get them to change something they've set their hearts on is to not to play or buy anything. But of course you all have to have the resolve and intestinal fortitude to go through with it. Most gamers do not.

[Nick Makiaveli]

Sandpit, on 24 November 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

"over featured" =/= "OP"

There's a distinct different between the two. OP implies that it is jsut about an insta-win. The latest bandwagons are poptart, lrms, acs, and arty. (IF you don't believe me feel free to peruse the forums and count the number of threads on those subjects alone)

Almost every one of the complaints involves "They're OP because I get hit by a lot of them". Hate to break it to ya, but that's coordination and teamwork, not OP weapons

If all of those were truly OP and out of balance you would see nothing but that on the field. You would also not be able to win with other weapons and systems. You can, players do it all the time everyday. That's not opinion that's factual. Just because a select portion of the player population uses a select few builds and systems doesn't make them "OP" or unbeatable

What he said. Numbers can lie. Gauss takes some skill to use well. Doesn't mean it needs to be buffed, but that you do if you can't use it.

Taemien, on 24 November 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

Except for the fact that this community, or rather the gaming community overall, doesn't participate in a betas properly. Rather than actually going in to test things, using things, abusing things, and overall just playing in every crazy way possible to see where the bugs are, they instead play it like its a release.

Then complain when things are imbalanced on release.

As for what Fupdup said in his OP, yes, thats about how you have to do it. You can't say LRM5s are OP when only 2% of people are even using them. You can't get medium pulse lasers buffed when they see an appearance in just about every match.

But I do want to warn you all before you undertake this. Just because you think something is OP and you state 'abusing' it. PGI may still not change it. ECM is a good example. Some of you are quoting that it got nerfed because it was abused. How was it nerfed? It still blocks streaks. The only 'nerf' it got was a hardpoint slot restriction, and a silly BAP counter.. that really one could argue wasn't a hit on ECM but a buff to BAP to make it useful for most light mechs.

Remember, ultimately they will change their game how they see fit. If everyone starts using medium lasers and they decide thats how they want MWO to be, it will stay that way. The only true fire way to get them to change something they've set their hearts on is to not to play or buy anything. But of course you all have to have the resolve and intestinal fortitude to go through with it. Most gamers do not.

So your post boils down to you are a "real gamer', most of us are not, and PGI is too stupid to know that most gamers as not as smart as you?

[DaZur]

FupDup, on 24 November 2013 - 07:35 AM, said:

You didn't answer my question. We need/want a method to directly show that an entity is not properly "balanced," and does not rely on simply saying that something is imba by making a forum post, because forum posts don't usually get read (sometimes for the better, sometimes for the worse). What is that method?

You do it through communication... Not whining, not demanding, not inciting derision.

You guys truly confound me.... You have this bizarre mental block where if PGI doesn't immediately implement your suggestion or acknowledge your premise with fireworks and fanfare, you think they are ignoring you.

Your suggestion is divisive...

If enough people abuse the meta to influence the metrics through weighted data, all your suggestion does is forward an agenda... It doesn't prove anything.

[Deathlike]

DaZur, on 24 November 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

You do it through communication... Not whining, not demanding, not inciting derision.

I think some of us are past that point. Better to react to inaction with action. This is the closest thing to a silent protest (kinda like that #saveMWO drop event).

Quote

You guys truly confound me.... You have this bizarre mental block where if PGI doesn't immediately implement your suggestion or acknowledge your premise with fireworks and fanfare, you think they are ignoring you.

The problem is that that route has been tried where you provide logical arguments and reasoning with respectful discourse. Of course, when it isn't even responded to in kind (as in, actual feedback from PGI), then we are choosing to exercise our right to abuse the weapon of choice. It's kinda like those hunger protests or exercising the right to boycott something. For the most part, it's a natural human reaction to these things.

Quote

Your suggestion is divisive...

What would you have preferred?

Quote

If enough people abuse the meta to influence the metrics through weighted data, all your suggestion does is forward an agenda... It doesn't prove anything.

It probably won't in the end, but admittedly eventually it'll get their attention one way or another. It won't be a pleasant resolution.

For instance, despite the PPC heat increase, PPC usage is still high (general ERPPC overusage has gotten down, which is appreciable). Although it has the positive side effect of putting more ERL and LL in play, ghost heat is still undermining the impact of laser usage, so it's not having the result as it should.

Let's not even get to the discussion of ECM (which PGI has nominally evacuated).

Of course, feel free to disagree. PGI won't care/read our civil discourse anyhow.

Edited by Deathlike, 24 November 2013 - 03:21 PM.

[Sandpit]

DaZur, on 24 November 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

You do it through communication... Not whining, not demanding, not inciting derision.

You guys truly confound me.... You have this bizarre mental block where if PGI doesn't immediately implement your suggestion or acknowledge your premise with fireworks and fanfare, you think they are ignoring you.

Your suggestion is divisive...

If enough people abuse the meta to influence the metrics through weighted data, all your suggestion does is forward an agenda... It doesn't prove anything.

How do you "abuse" a meta?

[Roadbeer]

I'm sure there are laws against it.

Point on the mechlab where the naughty developer touched you.

Edited by Roadbeer, 24 November 2013 - 03:21 PM.

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 24 November 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

How do you "abuse" a meta?

I don't know... it needs to be "defined".

On the other hand, I'm unsure if I'm making inappropriate contact with the 3rd PPC on the 732 I have.

[Mark Brandhauber]

Fupdup is right. normally i would be counter to this logic, you have shown me the error of my ways it is the only way to make pgi take notice. Time to re-equip most of mechs with the current cheese builds. twin guass or ac20 , ac5 and ppcs, multiple acs for me! And make my guys run highlander, victors and whatever else becomes cheeseable (this will be difficult.)

note: I am not being sarcastic

Edited by Mark Brandhauber, 24 November 2013 - 03:46 PM.

[GalaxyBluestar]

Sandpit, on 24 November 2013 - 03:19 PM, said:

How do you "abuse" a meta?

i thought the game was balanced, i don't see any meta's anymore, poptarting lurming arty!?! they're stratagies not metas! hitreg has pretty much helped level the damage output discrepancy between energies and ballistics. lurmers are balanced and valid tactics and are actually working exactly as they were supposed to. snipers and poptarts may rule the top but has anyone tried any other strategy against them except forumwarrior?

light's are now hit-able too so no more spider op {scrap} ac's are being used in fair moderation compared to lasers and missiles.

just help bring back srms with their hitreg {i hardly ever see these weapons} and i think there's no real need to "take matters into our own hands"

Mark Brandhauber, on 24 November 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

normally i would be counter this logic but you have truly shown me the error of my ways. Time to re-equip most of mechs with the current cheese builds. twin guass, ac5 and ppcs, multiple acs for me!

note: I am not being sarcastic

my many lasors burns you before you can pull the gauss trigger and will race you to damage output with your poptart, cause i know how to use cover, spot for lurms and perhaps even some CQC flanking if you've really screwed up. {thankyou hitreg fix may many more tidings come for HSR}

stop QQ, end the nerfs and carry harder guys.

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 24 November 2013 - 03:37 PM.

[Sandpit]

I don't get it...

Ok, so if I start a merc unit and I recruit players and send them to ole' Sand's SuperLaser Symposium and turn them from talentless noobs into an elite pew pew pew crack shot unit and we all use a bunch of energy builds and start wiping out every team we face (your personal opinion on energy weapons is irrelevant btw) then does that make energy builds "OP" all of a sudden?

It's the same exact argument when it comes to arty, poptarts, ballistics, etc. You have units that have taught their members to use those particular weapons and strategies to their utmost potential. That has NOTHING to do with a weapon being "op"

[GalaxyBluestar]

Sandpit, on 24 November 2013 - 03:38 PM, said:

Ok, so if I start a merc unit and I recruit players and send them to ole' Sand's SuperLaser Symposium and turn them from talentless noobs into an elite pew pew pew crack shot unit and we all use a bunch of energy builds and start wiping out every team we face (your personal opinion on energy weapons is irrelevant btw) then does that make energy builds "OP" all of a sudden?

exactly my point, if you become successful then others follow that success and all of a sudden people think it's op. then somebody thinks there's an imbalance, OMG the meta spam and then someone oh so very wise advises us that if you're sick of it and want to change it then spam it in game and the devs bend over via statistics cause they don't see figure manipulation when they see it.

hence i wanted nothing to happen to ac's at all just something was wrong with the laser balance and as i found out it was hitreg, no need to screw around with so called "imbalances" but threads like these encourages the blind!

it happened to lurmers OMG SKY FILLED! and ecm wiped them from the game for months. now people want something similar to happen to poptarters, arty users etc. we got GH on so many more weapons than we needed because ppc's got spammed, you guys have no idea what kinda pandora's box you're meddling with if you're trying to seriously prod the devs into making the game just from your narrow POV. we never saw knockdowns fixed, everything else got sculpted around ecm's borkness cause missiles OMG meta criers, BT be damned make bap eccm etc. such pushes only enforce more of a mess.

i hate forum QQ but just taking that to the game with snark {i'ma loading up all mah cheese} is a similar disservice to the game balance. we're suffering the consequences of this enough already.

Edited by GalaxyBluestar, 24 November 2013 - 04:07 PM.

[KharnZor]

GalaxyBluestar, on 24 November 2013 - 04:05 PM, said:

exactly my point, if you become successful then others follow that success and all of a sudden people think it's op. then somebody thinks there's an imbalance, OMG the meta spam and then someone oh so very wise advises us that if you're sick of it and want to change it then spam it in game and the devs bend over via statistics cause they don't see figure manipulation when they see it.

hence i wanted nothing to happen to ac's at all just something was wrong with the laser balance and as i found out it was hitreg, no need to screw around with so called "imbalances" but threads like these encourages the blind!

it happened to lurmers OMG SKY FILLED! and ecm wiped them from the game for months. now people want something similar to happen to poptarters, arty users etc. we got GH on so many more weapons than we needed because ppc's got spammed, you guys have no idea what kinda pandora's box you're meddling with if you're trying to seriously prod the devs into making the game just from your narrow POV. we never saw knockdowns fixed, everything else got sculpted around ecm's borkness cause missiles OMG meta criers, BT be damned make bap eccm etc. such pushes only enforce more of a mess.

i hate forum QQ but just taking that to the game with snark {i'ma loading up all mah cheese} is a similar disservice to the game balance. we're suffering the consequences of this enough already.

[Sandpit]

I think you need to take OP with a grain of salt and add a little sarcasm to be honest. It's just like my thread. I actually agree with some of the things on that list but I've never jumped on the forums and said something should be removed. I understand that my personal experience with something may not be what the majority of the community experiences.

Too many players have a bad experience with something, post on here and QQ about it and then you get a select handful of others that share a similar experience and all of a sudden it's "See? I have 20 people who agree with me (nevermind the 20 that disagree, they're dumb and just trolling so their experience is invalid) so there MUST be something wrong"

Top that off with a lot of the players doing this weren't here for TRUE imbalances. When we had LRMageddon there wasn't a balanced counter argument or a group that was defending it (other than a few people who truly were exploiting a broken feature in my opinion), you have almost a universal and unanimous outcry because it was OP, not just inconvenient. That's why you get a lot of the snark and sarcasm from those of us that WERE here for things like that. We experienced first-hand what a true imbalance and op weapon does and how it worked in teh game.

"Whaaaaaaaaaaaaaaa, he jumped and shot me and I just am not really skilled enough to counter it, so it impedes my ability to have "fun" with the game" is NOT a symptom of true imbalance or an op weapon

[FupDup]

DaZur, on 24 November 2013 - 02:55 PM, said:

You do it through communication... Not whining, not demanding, not inciting derision.

You guys truly confound me.... You have this bizarre mental block where if PGI doesn't immediately implement your suggestion or acknowledge your premise with fireworks and fanfare, you think they are ignoring you.

---

We tried that already in a couple of situations. For instance, there are probably at least 4-5 different threads about convergence, and in those cases the authors do not use insults or any offensive language. They made their case in a completely respectful way, i.e. Homeless Bill's or DocBach's ideas. There have also been cases for hardpoints to be size-based, and there have been a number of authors who proposed the idea in a non-inflammatory way (and yes, there were also a few who were jerks about it, but I don't care about them). There have also been some simple threads regarding +stat changes on certain items, giving medium mechs more maneuverability (I'm referring to more current requests, ones made after the devs did their first "pass" on mediums in the past), etc. etc.

The bottom line is, just nudging their elbow and saying "Eh? Eh? Eeeehhh? Ever thought of this? Wanna do that? How about this-that?" is not guaranteed to have a tangible impact. It doesn't help that in many of the examples above, they already have a hard-wired position on those issues and will thus not ever make changes based on any amount of communication over any length of time regarding those issues. I'm not saying this is good or bad, I'm just saying that this is the reality that we live in.

Edited by FupDup, 24 November 2013 - 05:48 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

FupDup, on 24 November 2013 - 05:35 PM, said:

We tried that already in a couple of situations. For instance, there are probably at least 4-5 different threads about convergence, and in those cases the authors do not use insults or any offensive language. They made their case in a completely respectful way, i.e. Homeless Bill's or DocBach's ideas. There have also been cases for hardpoints to be size-based, and there have been a number of authors who proposed the idea in a non-inflammatory way (and yes, there were also a few who were jerks about it, but I don't care about them). There have also been some simple threads regarding +stat changes on certain items, giving medium mechs more maneuverability (I'm referring to more current requests, ones made after the devs did their first "pass" on mediums in the past), etc. etc.

The bottom line is, just nudging their elbow and saying "Eh? Eh? Eeeehhh? Ever thought of this? Wanna do that? How about this-that?" is not guaranteed to have a tangible impact. It doesn't help that in many of the examples above, they already have a hard-wired position on those issues and will thus not ever make changes based on any amount of communication over any length of time regarding those issues. I'm not saying this is good or bad, I'm just saying that this is the reality that we live in.

Correct - PGIs ability to react to rational discussions from the community is non-existent.

They do react to extreme outcry but it has to be super bad and has some sort of monetary impact on them.

Data is what guides a lot of their decisions and that is not a bad thing if they know how to look at data correctly. So the faster people spam something OP (which eventually happens anyway) the faster the data will show an imbalance of weapons/builds etc as well as the devs seeing them in game more, as well as forum outcry. All of those things together eventually MAY force them to take action.

Communication does not because they believe that the forums are the upper 1% of the game that should not be catered to as they want to hook as many new players as possible and balance for the lowest common denominator.

So even with our efforts to spam something OP I still don't know if it would make an impact unless the lower tier games get flooded with it too.

I tried to communicate all through closed beta and open beta along with many other rational and reasonable people. They were ignored most of the time which leads to people trying different avenues to just be heard.

PGI doesnt actually have to action what people say but some feedback on why rational arguments are not considered would be a good start. The only time they touch on them is 'We tested this internally and it didnt work' which leads to MORE questions not less.

[Sandpit]

I will say this. During CB, they were actually really good, in my opinion, about communicating. They actually got involved in conversations, gave their own feedback on player ideas, and even discussed player suggestions. You can say what you want about the "community being mean" and running the devs off, but that's just ridiculous. They have the power and ability to silence anyone they want, so they don't have to allow that type of behavior.

It is what it is though. I'm optimistic enough (for now) to hope they're just too busy working on the game to be active participants on the forums (and apparently twitter as well) lately

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 24 November 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

It is what it is though. I'm optimistic enough (for now) to hope they're just too busy working on the game to be active participants on the forums (and apparently twitter as well) lately

I would normally agree with this, except it feels like the devs are like completing this final paper or something since the starting timer was set (launch day) and their self-imposed deadline delays feels like the equivalent of asking for more time. Of course, they are delayed because it is dependent on another system (UI 2.0) which is like trying to rely on other paper to justify findings on a new one.

Inevitably, they are busy for the work that was created for themselves. This isn't necessarily a good or bad thing but it's starting to amount to a bucket list that'll never get finished.

[Victor Morson]

KharnZor, on 24 November 2013 - 01:30 PM, said:

I refuse to submit to any meta for any reason.
The 1 honorable bone in my body that's left wont allow it.

Yes, because clearly "honor" demands you to run inferior weapons in an online team sim-shooter. If you were to do less, you would be a disgrace... ?

[MustrumRidcully]

Sandpit, on 24 November 2013 - 12:10 PM, said:

That's pretty much what he's saying to do....

"Broken" "OP" and "Useless" are 3 of the most common words used here. If those posts were factually correct you would see nothing, and I mena absolutely nothing, but ballistic poptarts and lrm mechs on the field. You definitely wouldn't see anyone win a match in anything but those. Do you see what we're getting at?

You assume that just because something is OP everyone uses it. That's clearly not the case, and never has been, in no game that was ever played.
I bet there are even people that still play Tic Tac Toe, a game that has an "optimum strategy", and don't use the optimum strategy.

But the more people use the OP stuff, the more likely it's actually identified as such by the developers and then eventually addressed. Of course, even then it takes months, as seen by the PPC meta.

(As a side note, I wonder what PGI would do to "balance" Tic Tac Toe? Introduce "ghost os and xs? What about checkers)

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 25 November 2013 - 01:26 AM.