8
Josef Nader, on 06 February 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:
There is one big flaw in your logic. In order to preserve the feel and tone of this game, mechs need to be tough and hard to kill. Nerfs are designed to increase the time to kill. Buffs are designed to decrease the time to kill. The big complaint (whether or not I agree with it) is that 40 damage pop tarts have a time to kill that is out of whack with other builds. If everything gets buffed, the time to kill drops and the game loses some of its flavor, in my opinion.
Mechs should be resilient and hard to put down. Hence, everything that puts them down too quickly needs to be toned down.
Mechwarrior has always been different than Battletech, both the Tabletop and the novels. It has always been about being effective on missions. You take the best you have on any given mission, and do your best to eliminate threats as soon as possible.
What most of the people who complain about the "meta" (or what I like to call "min-maxing") say, is that it doesn't feel like something.
Seriously. It's a shooting game. It's never. Ever. EVER. Going to feel like the lore. It's never going to feel like the Tabletop game. And it shouldn't. It's made so you can shoot people. And whenever someone can shoot someone else, they will try to do so in the most efficient manner possible.
This is why there are nuclear bombs pointed at people, which, I'll admit is one point in your favor that you haven't brought up. The difference in this game is, one side still wins. There is no mutually assured destruction.
I don't know about you, but I don't want to spend 40 minutes hunting someone down in a huge map and then spend five minutes out in the open torso twisting as we slowly strip each other with whatever weapon we think will fit the range we're currently in. I want to get in, constantly readjust my position, and kill without taking damage.
The problem is you want to be taking damage as well as dealing damage. That may be the "flavor" you want. But it will never. Ever. EVER. be the best thing for a game where you can AIM AND SHOOT PEOPLE. More to come on this in one of the lower posts about using dirt as unlimited armor.
Reno Blade, on 07 February 2014 - 12:21 AM, said:
It seems you are contradicting yourself.
Putting people into different brackets would lead to smaller brackets and you don't find matches at all.
Wasn't this the reason we had some Elo changes lately? High elo players not beeing able to find matches sometimes.
If you have an environment where EVERYONE lives longer (e.g. less pinpoint damage), the game is much more fun. You can take a risk and don't be instant-killed by "best" players.
If the "meta" would be nerfed (preferably pinpoint weapons), the mentioned Rambo would have a chance to survive and your team would need to shoot a bit longer.
But if you make weapons more effective that are not as strong, you will just kill everyone even faster with any weapon.
If weapons are too good, the game will be as fast as Call of duty and Battlefield and armor will make little difference.
If 12 mechs run at each other, and the teams are effective, yes. Some people will go down fast. That's because if the team is efficient, they will be aiming at the same mech. No matter what weapons they are using. Read that again. NO MATTER WHAT WEAPONS THEY ARE USING. That's just attrition.
Now as for the point of ELO and brackets.
My original point in this thread was that higher ELO players should only be playing other similarly skilled players. AND. AND. AND. it needs better queue times. Not either.
What this means, is they need to find a way to bring new players and keep them playing long enough to be skilled enough to make it into the higher tier. Not remove the difference in tiers.
And this admittedly is one point in favor of allowing people to live longer, so they have more play time actually fighting.
The problem is though, if they get used to playing that way and then they move up into a new tier, they will be killed fast no matter what the meta is.
When I play any online game, I do not play the story mode. This isn't meant to be bragging but to make a point.
I was world champion 1v1 sniper player 2005 in Star Wars Battlefront II (PC). I never once played the story mode all the way through. Ever. And I still periodically play the game online.
I did this because I knew I wanted to be competitive. I knew I wanted to win. I knew I wasn't there to just have fun every once and awhile. More on this replying to the next post.
Craig Steele, on 07 February 2014 - 03:42 AM, said:
Agree in principal, but completly irrelevant to the casual gamer that logs on for an hour of mech stomping laser blasting fun.
Seriously all those guys the Pro's chew up as canon fodder have feelings you know. They'll take a few knocks for sure, but if all they get to do is look at load screens, they'll be gone soon enough. If you're in denial over that, well I can see why you argue so.
Then what will the die hards do, scream about "failed to find match" screens I expect.
The game has to cater for the majority population or it DIES, which means making it entertaining to the casual gamer.
Ah. Casual gamers. Playing a game that was once thought to be a future simulator. These people need to be put in a lower queue for this. Where more and more people can be brought in and actually play.
My suggestion for this would actually to have it be locked chassis in one queue, and personalized mechs in another. If you're going to spend the time to fit out a mech, you should know that it's going to be put up against other fitted mechs. And that if your mech doesn't hold up, or your tactics (more on tactics later) don't hold up, you will die and deserve to die. Go have your mech stompy robot fun in another queue.
To separate this and make it better, give the modded mech queue incentives (CW, viewable ELO, ladder system, something!) and let the locked chassis queue just be what it is now: randoms. People can get better in randoms and earn money to build a mech that will work in the ELO system. The fact that you want your mech to work in the ELO system but it doesn't means you really don't want to win the ELO.
Hearthstone has been gaining popularity recently, and while it might appeal to a larger audience, it has something like what I've described above, a casual aspect (albeit you can take whatever deck you want), and a ranked one.
Reno Blade, on 07 February 2014 - 03:56 AM, said:
Ellen, if you want a shooter with one-shot style where tactic is > everything else, please play CS, CoD and BF instead.
I can understand that you want to be competitive and you guys are always a nasty opponent, but you also have to remember that this is a Mech game where you have multiple weapons, multiple different mechs and all of them are armored and should not die in seconds.
Do you have fun moving 5-10 minutes into a good position and then shooting everything to bits in 10 seconds (exaggerated)?
I'd call that a waste of time!
If you can't have "action" (aka. FUN) in a game, why play it? Beeing in spectator mode for more time than in your mech (not even speaking about actually fighting) is NOT fun.
Therefore, I say the balance between moving into position and actually fighting (a.k.a. time to die when combat starts) needs to be adjusted to have more time in combat than out of combat.
All this is because we don't have respawn. If you have respawn, you can be a lot faster back into action (like in Unreal Tournament).
But we have 15min matches and only one mech.
Thinking about future modes that could involve repair and multiple maps without full repair&rearm to fight a scenario, then the whole thing increases even more so.
If you want any kind of combat to last longer, use cover more effectively. Use position more effectively. It sounds like you want an open vs open match where both sides can shoot each other in the open longer. That's not tactics. Using cover is -by far- more tactical than shooting someone in the open for a long time.
The fun you want has been addressed above. And it will be again below. As for now, you need to learn how to have fun taking advantage of certain things (like 4 mans and using cover even MORE effectively) that will improve your chances of staying alive and fighting longer.
I do think that respawn modes would alleviate a lot of the criers who claim they don't get to play much. Also different sized queues. (more on private lobbies coming at some point)
Reno Blade, on 07 February 2014 - 05:33 AM, said:
It's because you CANT survive in that situation that I'm posting and that the "meta" needs a nerf.
If you are not in a meta mech yourself, you are dead in the second you get shot.
There are mechs with less armor than a 80t mech, no JJ, or XL engine. Not to forget anything that needs speed (light/med) that get legged instantly, or outright killed.
Would it be so bad if you had to land multiple shots instead of 1 to get all your damage on target? Wouldn't that show the "skills" of the good players even more so?
But no, point&click is more "pro".
If you want to compare MWO to a shooter, then the meta is running around with sniper rifles and instashooting everyone who is not as fast as you.
Did you play CoD and get permanently one-shot by quick-scope snipers bunny hopping around the map and not even have a chance to use your MP/Assault rifle? That what it compares to.
Yes, if you don't plan to play Meta in the Pug group at all, that would be fine then.
Would that mean all the "Meta players" would never fight in the other queues/brackets again? I doubt that.
But even when you say, 'its no fun pug-stomping', why are there so many "meta players" who still only play in "meta" mechs like the highlander instead of trying to have fun playing "average" mechs/weapons and maybe proving that its really skill > build?
It looks like win > fun no matter the "cost".
Which two scenarios?
Moving 10 minutes and dieing in 10 seconds vs. beeing a spectator for >7.5minutes?
Thats the one scenario you described (tactics>all killing your opposing team) vs. the typical end of a player facing "Meta players" (in pug matches) (dying early and quick and then need to spectate the majority of the game).
Just because our philosophies are different doesn't mean that either one is correct. You have to learn to play the system whatever it is. And guess what. You can survive the situation. If you play effectively enough. That includes your mech layout and teammates you bring with you. Also see posts about ELO queues and additional play modes above.
I have fun by winning. Because I'm a competitive person. Sorry you're not as competitive as to want to win within the current system and instead believing you'll only be better in a future one. Also sorry if this comment is snarky. But you're being ridiculous about the people that play this way.
By the way, I guess I'll go ahead and address this.
Winning individual fights is all about playing as a team, getting position, and using cover or movement more efficiently. It's only partly about shooting better. When you want to shoot each other longer, you're taking away the other aspects (especially using cover more BECAUSE: (and I want you to hear this) when you are forced to use weapons (and by forced I mean there's ALWAYS going to be a best set up, whether it's for opens or specific maps) that make you train on targets longer, you are going to be out in the open longer.
The shooting in MWO is a ton slower than those other games you mentioned as well. They just feel faster because you respawn (usually).
Kaldor, on 07 February 2014 - 06:30 AM, said:
Some mechs will never be competitive until there is a scaling pass done. The Awesome is one of them. Nearly as big as an Atlas, huge hit boxes, less armor, less of everything, almost entirely energy weapon dependent, etc. I can think of a few other mechs that have that same issue...
So sayeth the "~The Best HGN player in the game". You want to play the poptart thing, cool. Thats your deal. I did the poptart thing for a long time, and got bored. But dont act like its hard...
Even if they "fix" SRMs, there are other factors that limit brawlers like a broken heat system that punishes play styles that require DPS over time, but have no effect on meta builds. Poor mech size scaling, mech sizes need to be based on armor. Hardpoint sizes need to be put in place to put some limitations on .....
Ah screw it. Ive been over this crap a 1000 times and Im not typing it in again.
I agree with your statement that scouting needs to be done, but lets look at this when youre in a PUG drop. 4 guys jump in some meta build, in voice chat, and wreck shop. Been there, got the t-shirt. They have the upper hand because the builds are that much better than everything else. Scouting in a PUG game is minimal unless your lance is doing it. Most maps have very defined places where sniping builds work very well, and no amount of scouting is going to make a difference. What you say makes sense in a perfect world, but the broken aspects of the game are hindering it.
Im also seeing a "please dont nerf my (insert mech and build here)" statement from you. Do you honestly think that TTK is OK right now? Yeah, if you are using lasers and SRMs, TTK is fine. But meta builds far outshine everything else in effectiveness.
The "~The Best HGN player in the game." bit is from another thread, so I gave homage to it. I'm very egotistical, but I try not to let it show, usually. I hardly ever call people out, I try not to be disrespectful, and I don't do negative slam tactics such as "blah blah you suck".
I like your suggestions about allowing other weapons to be useful. I don't like the fact that you say it's not hard. The act itself, of course, is not too difficult. The difficulty comes when you're facing another team doing it effectively as well, or when they get close enough to brawl (and yes, some brawling IS effective.) If you only have a split second to shoot the enemy, you have to be EXTREMELY skilled to do it better than they. Or being in position to fight against those that move in on you. That takes skill. And to do it consistently IS hard.
Admittedly, it CAN sometimes get boring. Especially against people who don't know what to do against it. Then I face a really good team and it's intense and I'm not bored of it anymore.
Josef Nader, on 07 February 2014 - 07:58 AM, said:
Ellen, I'm going to chime in here. I'm a big fan of slow, methodical shooters. I have spent many hours tensely crawling face-first in the mud for several minutes hunting for the teltale 4-5 pixels that denote another player before getting killed in a single shot by someone who saw me first. I quite like those games, but MechWarrior is not those games nor should it ever be.
Mechs are tough. Mechs are durable. In tabletop, it takes a monumental amount of firepower to bring down the heaviest assaults, and even lights and mediums can withstand a solid amount of punishment before going down. That dynamic changes a bit in MWO, as our damage is not randomly placed and skill can apply damage repeatedly in the same spot. It's the nature of the game, and I would not have it any other way. That said, long time to kill is part of the mistique and flavor of this game. It should take coordinated fire from a lance of mechs to drop a mech in anything less than 10-15 seconds, even if the enemy MechWarrior is holding still. Our fighting robots need to feel tough, and even at the competitive level mechs should take a beating before they go down. It's one of the Unique Selling Points of this game, and it needs to be expanded on.
In TT, if you have 8-12 mechs focusing one mech, how "long" does it take to get that mech down? Probably "15 seconds" of combat time. Or less.
The difference here is in the TT you aren't really in the open. You're taking advantage of cover, and you probably are only playing 4v4, where it takes somewhere closer to three rounds of constant focus fire to bring down a heavy mech (30 seconds of in game time) I say less above, because the more people shooting a mech, the faster it will go down. It just feels like it takes forever in MWO because there's almost always more people than that shooting your mech. If you notice in 1v1, you will tend to last longer if you are playing correctly. If you are getting shot at by 8 mechs, and they get to choose where to hit you, you deserve to die in 5 seconds or less of you coming out of cover.
This to me proves that people who use TT as a crutch need to be realistic about a shooting game. It is a SLOW shooting game. It is just not an hour long game to set up and play 6v6 on.
Mercules, on 07 February 2014 - 08:59 AM, said:
Same here, I play a lot of DayZ and there are times where you are certain someone is about but not sure of where they are and so you patiently move through the area in cover. The patient person ends up surviving, the impatient ends up on the coast starting over from scratch.
One of the biggest issues in Mechwarrior, from my point of view, is the pinpoint accuracy of convergence. With convergence Alpha Striking just makes sense. Convergence makes it the defacto meta especially combined with screwy heat. So mechs that can mount multiple weapons that work well in an alpha strike and deliver all their damage in one quick punch rule the meta. AKA Highlander.
I honestly think removing convergence would resolve so many issues. Someone pointed out that what would happen then is someone would realize they could put 2 PPCs on one arm and again have them strike the same point. This is true, but it also means people only have to strip one arm off the mech to remove the majority of your firepower. This would be why the Griffin is not terribly popular, it's weapons are all on one side making it easy to disarm.
Think of it this way. Removing Convergence will lessen the value of hopping up, firing, and then dropping. Why? Because to hit the same location with all major weapons you would have to fire at least twice with most mechs unless you decided to put your eggs all in one basket, so to speak, in the arms. You could possibly hit the mech with everything but it wouldn't be everything hitting one section of the mech.
As for scouting... scouting is a joke in the game. ECM means you can hide easier BUT it is almost better to have that back covering the team instead of out on a scouting run. Non-ECM Scouts get noticed and spend most of their time ducking PPCs and LRMs. Lacking voice chat with the whole team they have to STOP and type in information. Often you can't even light up all the mechs because there is a DDC or your counterpart light with ECM wandering around among them.
If you DO Bother to scout you get 0 reward for your efforts. Why? Because you don't typically get Spotter bonuses, those go to the people who are just over the ridge from the enemy but not in LoS but are closer than you and have locked them up via your lock before the other teammate fired missiles and so being the closest mech with a lock they get the Spotter bonus. You don't get any of the XP/CBills for component destruction, kill assists, kills, or anything else because shooting a target while scouting means you just alerted them, and their team as to YOUR location which makes it very difficult to continue to provide information to the team since you have to type it in and now you have plasma/shells/missiles inbound and likely one of their own fast movers headed in your direction.
See, what typically happens when you have 4 meta Alpha-Sniper mechs in a 4 man on the other team is that they focus fire anyone who comes into view. If a "scout" gets LoS on them they will destroy it as soon as they can, all firing at it. You can duck and dodge one decent skilled player at that range for a bit, but 4? Why would they kill a Scout? Because in PUGs people still use LRMs and with a scout with eyes those LRMs can be a problem for someone who is trying to Jump-Snipe. So they kill the one person that is in LoS which ends the threat.
So basically the easiest way to play this game right now is a 4 man with 4 heavy alpha builds, preferable with JJs.
In matches where teams are of more equal skill level, scouting is the most important role on the field. Min-max "meta" matches know this and lights are a big deal. Bigger than big, a HUGE deal.
Also, the game lasts 15 minutes. There's no time, and the maps aren't big enough for "actual" scouting.
As far as convergence and restricting mechs, see previous replies regarding split queues.
Mercules, on 07 February 2014 - 09:06 AM, said:
Here is a question for you. Why isn't that true of Awesomes and Atlas? They are both one of the biggest mechs in game with immense firepower. Somehow that statement just doesn't seem to apply to them in the same way. Maybe it is because we are not exposing ourselves but that Highlanders can break cover for just long enough to Alpha their "immense firepower" and then are back in cover. 4 of them can do it in a very coordinated fashion too. Why can't Atlas and Awesomes do that? What is the difference here... Hmmmmmmm...
People don't typically make the mistake of exposing themselves too often. What happens instead is that Highlanders have the means to expose you very easily without exposing themselves for too long to return fire. *Pop*-*Blam*
Your games are over in ten turns? We typically spend 10 turns just FINDING the enemy, another 5 maneuvering with potshots then about 5-10 more actually shooting.
You're right. Awesomes and Atlases can't use cover as effectively. But the alpha isn't the problem here. It's the JJ. Either limit what you can do with the JJ, or make it use more heat. I think the TT feels a lot more hot. It's about the cover.
Also, you're dead wrong about the people "don't typically" make the mistake of exposing themselves. It happens ALL THE TIME. Most people just aren't fast enough to live through it. See previous replies regarding more TT time tables.
Fut, on 07 February 2014 - 09:25 AM, said:
Battletech/Mechwarrior has never been a quick battles game. The best part of the IP is that it's a battle of attrition, you slug it out with your enemies, picking pieces off of them and loosing pieces of your own Mech, until finally one of you goes down for good.
This "pew-pew you're dead" game is fun, but it's not BT.
Again, see TT replies above.
Kaldor, on 07 February 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:
I agree again. But the issue is that the Highlander is too effective at that role. 1 is a tough mech, 4 of them working in concert is a nightmare. And the meta builds are really effective from about 100m out to 500m+.
Ive said it before, and Ill say it again. Its not hard to put 2 PPCs, and (insert ACs of choice) on to a mech that can jump. Its not hard to get in voice chat with 3 other guys. Its not hard to sit in 3PV and peak the hill to scout. Its not hard to jump and shoot. The problem is that every other weapon/build is inferior. You cant boost every other weapon up, or it destroys the TTK for a mech. So what to do?
We've mentioned TT before. See above.
3pv is restricted in 12v12. It is hard to jump and shoot someone when they are jumping and shooting you as well.
Also, it's harder to lead targets than to keep your cursor over a given spot.
Stop undermining the skill these take just because you "shoot once", there's a crapton of other stuff you have to do to be great at it.
MischiefSC, on 07 February 2014 - 10:07 AM, said:
I'll chime in a bit just because I took a few weeks off from MW:O lately (Assassins Creed IV: Black Flag, god tier game. Seriously, we need to add the Oberon Confederation to MW:O just so I can play a pirate in a mech) and just came back to check out the new UI 2.0.
I actually like it. There are some things to improve, obviously, but the potential is clearly there and I get where the update is going.
It felt very.... CoD. I hopped in my Orion which has always been a solid performer for me. It was quick and nimble and so were my enemies. Everyone died very quickly. Bluntly? Combat in MW:O has become so quick and twitch that it made Assassins Creed feel thoughtful and methodical. I'm not sure I like that for MW:O. I love me some ARMA 2, one shot one kill sort of environment and it can be fun for that but the flavor and identity of Mechwarrior and Battletech is being in a huge, heavily armed and armored robot. It should be slower, better armored. It should feel like a giant robot, not a power suit.
Not to draw fire here but I'm all for nerfing. I admit, I don't like to play my Victors or a HGN. I do when I get the chance to play in 12mans because you either bring the meta or you sandbag your team and I carry my own weight at it but the advantages those mechs provide (high pinpoint, high mobility, small profile, great agility for the firepower/armor/mobility) makes not taking them a self-imposed nerf. Yes, they can be beaten. Obviously they can, nobody is saying otherwise. It's that with only a bit of practice anyone can do better in one of those two mechs than they can in something else.
Just please remember that the issue isn't those specific mechs or even jumpjets. They are just the point of concurrence for the pinpoint damage meta of ACs and PPCs along with narrow torsos and high mobility. Those three issues (relative component size, engine size and torso turn rate and angle along with acceleration/deceleration and pinpoint damage for PPCs and ACs) are the source of the issue.
My respectful opinion would be to bring mechs of similar weight into some sort of maneuverability concurrence. Wider torsos (Awesome, Battlemaster) need more speed, wider degree of torso twist and more torso twist speed. Narrower torsos (Victor, Highlander) need less. The BM-1G taught me an important lesson - a mech that can't turn its torso 90 degrees is utterly worthless in brawling - you can't protect your side torso. You can't turn it enough to escape weapons fire from someone in front of you. You also can't turn sideways to track an opponent. You do something like that to Victors/Highlanders and you'll make them worthless as anything but snipers.
Give PPCs (possibly bigger ACs) a DOT effect. Even a brief one. 0.3 to 0.5 seconds is enough to spread damage across locations when poptarting or hill-humping. Maybe give PPCs 0.5 seconds of DOT for the first 5 damage points and then a 5 point 'whump' at the end? Literally reverse the projectile. It's a PPC anyway, it should be sending a laser-like effect to the target to create a transmission line and then arcing the lightning-like projectile down it. ACs in the 5,10,20 size can be a small burst of fire.
JJs... well, they're needed for mobility. JJ shake was great but perhaps have it not cause motion-sickness inducing shake to the screen but just the reticle? Can that be varied based on mechs weight? Larger the mech the more the shake and the longer it lasts?
JJs could use a -small- nerf. Not a huge one.
take the advantages of being accurate in a shooting game away, meaning take less skill.
(PLEASE)
Canada is too damn cold!
