304 replies to this topic

[luxebo]

JimEvolved, on 01 March 2014 - 05:23 PM, said:

So I am almost done getting what I want as far as skills from my first set of MWO mechs, Hunchies. Gonna get mastery on the 4h, that's probably the last thing then most on to my next chassis.

I see on the initial post that the first heavy mech listed for PUGs is the CTF-3D. Unlike the Hunchies where there is a very cool "Ultimate" guide on the medium mech forum, I'm having a little more trouble finding some comprehensive recommendations on the CTF series.

Is that recommendation still pretty current in the meta? Can someone maybe just give a sentence or two on why the CTF-3D is pretty good? Thanks much in advance for any information.

There is actually a small guide made by the same guy as well. Link: http://mwomercs.com/...taphract-guide/

[NRP]

No way the CN9-A is a Tier 1 mech. That thing is a total pile of crap.

[IraqiWalker]

NRP, on 01 March 2014 - 06:45 PM, said:

No way the CN9-A is a Tier 1 mech. That thing is a total pile of crap.

If you never played it, sure. If you know how to use it, it's a beast.

I personally love it, out of all the centurions (C-Bills ones that is)

Again, the only mech I can honestly look at my status, see 49% and go, that's still in good condition

[Bront]

JimEvolved, on 01 March 2014 - 05:23 PM, said:

So I am almost done getting what I want as far as skills from my first set of MWO mechs, Hunchies. Gonna get mastery on the 4h, that's probably the last thing then most on to my next chassis.

I see on the initial post that the first heavy mech listed for PUGs is the CTF-3D. Unlike the Hunchies where there is a very cool "Ultimate" guide on the medium mech forum, I'm having a little more trouble finding some comprehensive recommendations on the CTF series.

Is that recommendation still pretty current in the meta? Can someone maybe just give a sentence or two on why the CTF-3D is pretty good? Thanks much in advance for any information.

The 3D has:
- JJ mounts, so it can jump (for poptarting or added maneuverability)
- 2 Balistic points in 2 different locations, allowing for lots of different balistic builds, which are heat efficient
- 2 High mounted Torso Energy Hardpoints for hill humping, and 2 more in the arms.

It's only real flaw is that 'Phrats tend to lose their CT easily if you're not careful, and it's arms are about as low slung as you can get in a mech.

Edited by Bront, 02 March 2014 - 07:15 AM.

[luxebo]

How would the Banshee fare? It seemingly doesn't sound that awesome as of now, does it have any strong attributes to it? Also, how would the JJs affect the mech tiers, as now poptarts need more JJs to poptart, and etc?

Last thing, though unrelated, I haven't seen Victor Morson in a very long while actually, would like to see some feedback as he has helped before on the competitive look of the game. (Even if he may have had an agressive viewpoint/arguing over the community of things in the game.)

Edited by luxebo, 04 March 2014 - 06:38 PM.

[MavRCK]

luxebo, on 04 March 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:

How would the Banshee fare? It seemingly doesn't sound that awesome as of now, does it have any strong attributes to it? Also, how would the JJs affect the mech tiers, as now poptarts need more JJs to poptart, and etc?

Last thing, though unrelated, I haven't seen Victor Morson in a very long while actually, would like to see some feedback as he has helped before on the competitive look of the game. (Even if he may have had an agressive viewpoint/arguing over the community of things in the game.)

I posted my thoughts on /outreachhpg reddit forums but the white knights - super extremists / terrorist protectors of PGI/MWO - down-voted it to oblivion. It's a shame, you have /mwo which is the dark knight - extremely negative naysayers of PGI/MWO and the outsprout of SJR / QQ and a few other self-serving groups with their reddit forum attempts to ingratiate themselves to PGI. There's very little balanced and intelligent discussion as a result.

The Banshee is terrible. You have a ballistics version which relies on slow torso twisting to follow any thing moving at close to medium ranges -- torso laser version which will be too hot and rely on slow torso twist -- and semi boar's head equivalent that has 5 of laser hardpoints in the torso.... the Hero mech is a travesty... and I hope no one wastes their money.

While the medium pulse and large pulse lasers received some buffs and the jump jets got some attention, the overall state of balance of the game is unchanged and thus I perceive these changes to be insignificant. Recent posts by Russ and PGI such as believing the game should be oriented to single player because the majority of players do not play in a group suggests some serious logical flaws in their analysis --- which consider the current and past history of PGI should be expected.

Overall, the game is unbalanced, has not address fundamental issues of invisible walls and movement, and continues to demonstrate concerns in management's ability to assess the needs and the desires of the target audience in order to create a long-term viable game.

Edited by MavRCK, 05 March 2014 - 11:10 AM.

[TercieI]

I can't bring myself to hit "like" on that because it bums me out, but I can't disagree with any of it either.

indeed.

[Bront]

JJs changed enough to even out the playing field a bit in the assault teir, but barely. It really only killed the 1 JJ assault and heavy builds, and made poptarting a little harder with lesser fuel. I agree it won't change the meta much, but it does open up a little room for the other mechs.

The Banshee LM has a slower torso twist than the other models if i read the stats right, so there's some hope for the mech. We'll see as the regular ones get into the public. I think it has possible Tier 2 potential if the hit boxes work out well enough.

Weapon Balance still has a way to go.

[luxebo]

Bront, on 05 March 2014 - 01:50 PM, said:

JJs changed enough to even out the playing field a bit in the assault teir, but barely. It really only killed the 1 JJ assault and heavy builds, and made poptarting a little harder with lesser fuel. I agree it won't change the meta much, but it does open up a little room for the other mechs.

The Banshee LM has a slower torso twist than the other models if i read the stats right, so there's some hope for the mech. We'll see as the regular ones get into the public. I think it has possible Tier 2 potential if the hit boxes work out well enough.

Weapon Balance still has a way to go.

LM has more torso twist, but the others are tough lucked. Maybe if they can zombie enough, then they can have a usage maybe. I thought the 3S (I think it was) is a stronger Boar's Head (put AC20, couple large lasers, and 6 med lasers and max engine?) I don't think so if even Atlas variants (besides DDC), Battlemaster variants, and some Highlander variants get tier 3.

JJs I agree have had a change, but isn't enough I'd say. Sadly, I hope things change in MWO gameplay balance wise.

[Bront]

luxebo, on 05 March 2014 - 04:40 PM, said:

LM has more torso twist, but the others are tough lucked.

LM has more but slower torso twist. So the other variants might have a faster twist speed. That's what I ment.

[luxebo]

Bront, on 05 March 2014 - 05:09 PM, said:

LM has more but slower torso twist. So the other variants might have a faster twist speed. That's what I ment.

I see. Thanks for the info on the Banshee.

[IraqiWalker]

If you look them up on Smurfy you can see the engine sizes (some of them can go up to 400). They will have very good torso twist speed.

From what I've experimented with them. (Mostly designing builds and theory crafting) they have excellent potential as front line brawlers. You can mount terrifying firepower on them even while using STD engines and not lose out on mobility, or heat management. I recommend you get at least a STD 325 if you decide to get into that chassis, in my opinion it's the minimum size you want for your engine. You can get a 300 if you can go more ballistic oriented and low heat weapons.
BNC-3E
A basic set up for a BNC-3E. You can switch the STD 350 for an XL 400, or a STD 325 or 300 and still mount very powerful weapons in it.

BNC-3E Davionite

That's the super dakka version (for the devout Davionite in all of us) and it's a scary ballistic platform that excelles as a second line mech or a skirmisher, perhaps even as a Fire Support Unit.

[MavRCK]

MavRCK, on 05 March 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:

While the medium pulse and large pulse lasers received some buffs and the jump jets got some attention, the overall state of balance of the game is unchanged and thus I perceive these changes to be insignificant. Recent posts by Russ and PGI such as believing the game should be oriented to single player because the majority of players do not play in a group suggests some serious logical flaws in their analysis --- which consider the current and past history of PGI should be expected.

Overall, the game is unbalanced, has not address fundamental issues of invisible walls and movement, and continues to demonstrate concerns in management's ability to assess the needs and the desires of the target audience in order to create a long-term viable game.

Victor's thoughts:

http://www.reddit.co...nk_hes_good_at/

[Bront]

That's more a flaw in how they look at the numbers than anything.

More solo drops that group drops is a combination of:

1) Folks who group also solo drop, but not always the other way around
2) Groups are harder to coordinate, so tend to drop at a slower rate (Particularly bad for 12 mans)
3) A single group drop may contain 2, 3, 4 or 12 people, but only shows up as a single drop.
4) Lack of easily facilitated groups in game (in game launch client chat is really bad, no VOIP)
5) No easy support for a 5 man drop. a 6 man drop is at least 2 groups, but a 5 man drop can often be a 4 man and a solo player.
6) Getting 12 players together for a 12 man is a chore for any but the more hardcore players.

[MavRCK]

Bront, on 06 March 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:

That's more a flaw in how they look at the numbers than anything.

More solo drops that group drops is a combination of:

1) Folks who group also solo drop, but not always the other way around
2) Groups are harder to coordinate, so tend to drop at a slower rate (Particularly bad for 12 mans)
3) A single group drop may contain 2, 3, 4 or 12 people, but only shows up as a single drop.
4) Lack of easily facilitated groups in game (in game launch client chat is really bad, no VOIP)
5) No easy support for a 5 man drop. a 6 man drop is at least 2 groups, but a 5 man drop can often be a 4 man and a solo player.
6) Getting 12 players together for a 12 man is a chore for any but the more hardcore players.

Simply, what the argument we are seeing with the Launch module is PGI's analysis of the numbers. People disagree with PGI's conclusions - as do I.

http://en.wikipedia....ctive_reasoning

Deductive reasoning links premises with conclusions. If all premises are true, the terms are clear, and the rules of deductive logic are followed, then the conclusion reached is necessarily true.

An example of a deductive argument:

• All men are mortal.
  
• Socrates is a man.
  
• Therefore, Socrates is mortal.

ie. Along this vein...

1. Most players play alone.
2. In order to be successful as a company we need to provide the game most players want.
3. Therefore, we should provide a game that focuses on players playing alone.

The issue is... are these premises true or false? is the logic clear? and therefore the argument may be true but not necessarily sound...

Conversely, if you consider inductive reasoning:

http://en.wikipedia....ctive_reasoning

While the conclusion of a deductive argument is supposed to be certain, the truth of an inductive argument is supposed to be probable, based upon the evidence given.

So the truth as per PGI is probably as they see it... only many people disagree and have issues with the evidence...

See the various issues in multiple forms of logic PGI may or may not be using?

What distinguishes a leader is their ability to make successful decisions and have people believe in their decision-making.

Edited by MavRCK, 06 March 2014 - 07:01 PM.

[luxebo]

I'm pretty sure they have made more fallacies than that. I understand your concern on the way the game is going; I think our best bet is to just wait it out and hope, hope PGI makes the game better (and I really wish the money prospect of private vs public matches are separated, some of those things frustrate me a bit that has been mentioned by Paul in the Launch module.) But, I think we should be happy that progress is getting made in the first place, I'm happy enough that that is happening.

[MavRCK]

I'll be doing an update this coming tuesday... probably my last for a while..

The current Banshee Hero mech is a tier 2-3 assault by hardpoint analysis alone... The other variants will most likely all be tier 3 -- the one exception is the 4 ballistic LT hardpoint which might be a tier 2... I have to double-check its details... sustained DPS of a 4 AC2 or 2 AC2 / AC5 Jager in an assault chassis might be okay... but relying on torso turning to track an enemy is going to be an issue...

To be fair to PGI, they've done a lot of things positively from reviewing the medium pulse and large pulse lasers ... to addressing the jumpjets .. to ELO changes...

It's not as comprehensive as I would like... and one might argue... why are things difficult / broken / unchanged for so long...

In my field, it's good to accept responsibility for something that goes wrong or needs to be fixed -- shit happens -- so you do it.. and you do fast... and you do it DAMN WELL..

BUT... it's best to do something PERFECT the first time.

Perfection .. consistency .. reliability... strive to be better..

No excuses.. no exceptions.

[Bront]

MavRCK, on 06 March 2014 - 07:00 PM, said:

1. Most players play alone.
2. In order to be successful as a company we need to provide the game most players want.
3. Therefore, we should provide a game that focuses on players playing alone.

That's a good articulation of what's happening, but the problem with the logic (and this is PGI's issue, not yours) is the question between #1 and #2 is "Is this what players want?" They're assuming that because of what most players are doing, it's what they want.

An interesting breakdown I'd like to see is the average account age of Solo vs 2-3-4 man groups. The question there being about player retention.

[giganova]

MavRCK, on 07 March 2014 - 04:27 PM, said:

In my field, it's good to accept responsibility for something that goes wrong or needs to be fixed -- shit happens -- so you do it.. and you do fast... and you do it DAMN WELL..

BUT... it's best to do something PERFECT the first time.

Perfection .. consistency .. reliability... strive to be better..

No excuses.. no exceptions.

"The best part of waking up... is narcissism in your cup!"™

Edited by giganova, 18 March 2014 - 10:53 AM.

[MavRCK]

Hasn't been updated because Paul Inouye's balancing of the game is mind-boggling.