120 replies to this topic

[N E R E V A R]

Dar1ng One, on 27 May 2014 - 03:09 AM, said:

It doesn't exist, like your girlfriend.

Anyway, gg close.

Really? You're insulting his personal life because he does what he can to win a tournament without cheating? Wow completely lacking in class man.

[Kjudoon]

Ordellus, on 24 March 2014 - 11:07 PM, said:

You're claiming you got something like a 5 kill, 900 ish damage game..... 10 times...... in a machine gun spider...... in a couple hours?

Sounds legit.

Proving why mediums are the last choice in the game since lights are outperforming.

I ran a variety of missile mechs, just as I always do because I'm a lousy shot, solid pilot and my computer has FPS issues. Got only 49th in the Marik queue.

LRM20-30 SDH-2D2 (I was experimenting)
LRM 40 CPLT C4
LRM20-30 CPLT C1
LRM40 ON1-VA
LRM20-30 ON1-K
LRM20-30 VTR

Of course, with the amount of effort needed to pull it off, I question if tourneys are something I'm going to want to do again. Holiday weekends and tournaments bring out the worst in everybody, especially me. Teamwork was almost non-existant. Backstabbing, rampant. ECM at my level, disguistingly bad.

I had to quit using my teams TS server for periods because I could not keep up the 'no profanity' portion of my team's code of honor. Yes, we Seraphim are not perfect little angels all the time.

Sometimes, you just have to listen to the wisdom of Mark Twain "When angry, count to four; When very angry, swear."... just not on teamspeak.

Edited by Kjudoon, 27 May 2014 - 10:23 AM.

[RapidFire7]

This is what I was running during the Faction Challenge, getting constant match scores of ~90

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...6f38a52699b1410

Unfortunately I didn't have a lot of time to grind it out this weekend as I was working the whole time Still, 180th in Marik isn't bad

[Cimarb]

I run a missile boat almost exclusively (STK-5M, with XL engine, 40-50 LRMs, 4 MLs and electronics) and got 8th in Davion last tourney and somewhere in the high teens with about half of the playtime this tourney.

It's not about your build. It's about your skill and luck with getting a competent (but not good) team to back you up. I say that because you don't want a team that is "good" and dealing lots of damage (therefore reducing the amount of damage you can do before the enemy is dead), but competent enough to keep the enemy busy long enough for you to do plenty of damage and still win.

Dar1ng One, on 27 May 2014 - 02:08 AM, said:

Now, now, Jun, Smegler is right in the fact that you can run metabuild. Does PGI allow this? Unfortunately yes. Does it channel the the spirit, as the advert says top left as you scroll up, "Mechwarrior online, a battletech game".

Unfortunately no.

If you watched Smeg's videos, (I could only watch one as he is just a hideous looking chud), you will see the secret to his "meta game" is 2 x AC 5, 2 x PPC, artillery strike and pop tarting.

Is this mechwarrior online today? Unfortunately yes. Is this in the spirit of the battletech game on which it's based? Of course not.

The victor as an example has an AC20, srm 4, and 2 x medium lasers as its stock variant. There are other versions available of course but I am unable to find ANY version of an 2 x AC5, 2 x PPC Victor in any battletech field manual from 3025 to 3067. This is also true for Highlander's, Cataphracts, Shadow Hawks etc. You get the picture.

So there are options for PGI to use, one is to remove the battletech tag line because it is not a battletech game. Just have AC5's and PPC's only in the game. Nothing else, and rebrand as "snipe warrior online" or "sort of real tournament warrior online"

OR... the smarter harder option is to have really hard ruled hard points where you can only mount the weapon type based on the battletech lore of that particular variant, and then if you want to upgrade you will have to pay a lot of XP.

eg With my 2312000 Mech XP on my Atlas DDC say I wanted to break Atlas battletech lore and instead of mounting an AC20 or Gauss I want to mount 2 x Ultra AC5's, I would have to pay 500000 Mech XP for each Ultra AC5, and then, (your gonna love this) if my battlemech gets destroyed in battle I will have to start over Dark Souls style and earn another million mech xp to rebuild and modify a new stock frame.

It would bring instant balance, long time players would learn to look after their meta builds, and if lost, force them to adapt and think about tactics, teamwork, communication, and make the best with what's available, and gosh darn it, it might lead to some challenging fun and intense games.

Two issues.

First, I think this game is the closest video game I have EVER played to how I feel Battletech was meant to be. That means your whole "Battletech spirit" argument is simply your opinion.

Second, making unlocks be huge XP costs would only imbalance the game immensely against new pilots. You would then have an artificial "trial mech" lock on every mech you purchase that lasted for months, instead of the existing cbill requirement that can be overcome in a few days. This would be a horrible experience for new pilots, or anyone wanting to try something new.

On top of that, changing your mech loadout has nothing to do with experience, and lore has many, many variants that started because a mechwarrior changed the loadout themselves, a House wanted the mech to fit their style of combat better, or many other reasons, none of which had to do with "lore" at all. The only difference is time - making changes to a mech involved a lot of time "in lore", just like traveling between planets/systems to fight, and that is just not feasible in a video game, which is why we don't have to wait four months to travel between jump points or four weeks to modify our mech.

[Jun Watarase]

Cimarb, on 26 May 2014 - 04:02 PM, said:

If everything is a meta build, then nothing is a meta build.

Having 10 Jagermechs doesn't say anything, other than you can win (or lose in their case) with any build and drop deck. That means weapon balance is (respectively) in a pretty good place. We had brawler builds win, poptarts win, teams with LRMs win, etc. That is good.

Ultimately, what it comes down to is tactics and skill, and that, really, is the perfect example of balanced weapons.

Yea im pretty sure you guys arent using the commonly accepted definition of metabuild.

I dont know how you can say weapon balance is in a good spot when the tournament is dominated by PPC/AC boating. How many of the top team have been using primarily pulse lasers or SRMs? I dont know what the second round is like but apparently its mostly fast mechs since its conquest, so it may not be entirely PPC/AC boating in that round.

If teams are taking 10 of one mech into a tournament, that obviously means theres a problem there...unless they were deliberately choosing an underpowered option to make some kind of statement (machine gun locust for example). But nobody is going to say jagermechs are underpowered, so...

[Jun Watarase]

Eglar, on 27 May 2014 - 02:19 AM, said:

PGI hosts *a tournament* and people complain about Metabuilds.
So PGI gives you a team tournament people complain about not having a team and not being in their timezone.
PGI gives you a solo tournament, people complain about not being able to drop in a team.

Perfect excuse for losing.



Oh yea and back to the original thread my best games were:

1. JM6-FB 2xUAC2xLLas 5kills 7 assist 1555 Dmg
2. STK-M 2xPPC 1xAC20 5kills 6assist 1438 Dmg
3. CTF-3D 2xPPC 2xAC5 5kills 6assist 1372 Dmg
4. RVN-3L 2x ERLarge 4kills 7assisst 1155 Dmg
...
Dragonslyer 2xAC5 2xPPC
...
10. HGN 733 1x TAG 4x LRM15 Artemis 4 Kills 7 Assist 1068.


But yea, I see, all meta for you.

If your point is that you werent using meta builds, its kind of funny that almost everything on that list are metabuilds...with the possible exception of the firebrand.

I think it should be obvious to everyone here that actual player skill cannot be determined just because you did well in a metabuild. I can win chess tournaments quite easily if i used nothing but queens, but that doesnt mean im good at chess at all. Its entirely possible that someone in a metabuild may also be skilled but its impossible to detemrine that accurately as long as the metabuild is there.

Are we rules lawyering about what is legal and not? Because last i checked, this was legal outside of funerals too..

If we have a tournament where meta builds are banned/games played in them not counted, with a better scoring formulae that doesnt encourage timing kill shots and blocking teammates to prevent them from firing, then we might have a better gauge of skill rather than being largely decided by choosing a metabuild. But not like PGI is going to do that so we get these faux tournaments that are like oh look all the winners are using cyber akuma, gee i wonder why?

Edited by Jun Watarase, 27 May 2014 - 04:47 PM.

[Jun Watarase]

dario03, on 27 May 2014 - 09:11 AM, said:

Is the 4ml, 4mg Ember a metabuild? Not sure if he ran it this tourny but ShinVector said that he ran that last tourny. And in this tourny he took 3rd in Liao, and if I had been Liao I would of been 4th with one less point. (Took 11th in Merc Corps since I was 2 points shy of 10th).

Im guessing there are two main reasons for that :

1. Lights are really hard to kill with most weapons due to buggy hit registration, especially with lasers. This lets them live for much longer than an Atlas could which gives them more firing time to do damage. Especially when dropping solo since they can run away if things get unfavourable, while slower mechs are stuck if the enemy shows up and your teammates decide to run away instead of help.

2. Strike spam to boost damage scores.

Edited by Jun Watarase, 27 May 2014 - 04:48 PM.

[Cimarb]

Jun Watarase, on 27 May 2014 - 04:19 PM, said:

Yea im pretty sure you guys arent using the commonly accepted definition of metabuild.

I dont know how you can say weapon balance is in a good spot when the tournament is dominated by PPC/AC boating. How many of the top team have been using primarily pulse lasers or SRMs? I dont know what the second round is like but apparently its mostly fast mechs since its conquest, so it may not be entirely PPC/AC boating in that round.

If teams are taking 10 of one mech into a tournament, that obviously means theres a problem there...unless they were deliberately choosing an underpowered option to make some kind of statement (machine gun locust for example). But nobody is going to say jagermechs are underpowered, so...

As I posted earlier, it may help if you define what YOU think the definition of a metabuild is.

If a metabuild is PPC/AC, you need to go watch the tournament videos. There were quite a few matches where other builds were used extensively. You also realize that an AC2 and an AC20 are about as different as any other two weapons in the game, right?

For instance, the "10 of one mech" team that you are talking about is a horrible example, both because they lost and because everyone was amazed that they brought that drop deck because it is NOT "the meta" at the level they are playing at.

The drop in weight limit dramatically change the mechs that were bought AND the tactics that were used, as well. Where you saw a lot of assaults in the first round, you saw almost no assaults in the second round. For example, how many Victors did you see in the second round compared to the first?

[Eglar]

Jun Watarase, on 27 May 2014 - 04:26 PM, said:

If your point is that you werent using meta builds, its kind of funny that almost everything on that list are metabuilds...with the possible exception of the firebrand.

I think it should be obvious to everyone here that actual player skill cannot be determined just because you did well in a metabuild. I can win chess tournaments quite easily if i used nothing but queens, but that doesnt mean im good at chess at all. Its entirely possible that someone in a metabuild may also be skilled but its impossible to detemrine that accurately as long as the metabuild is there.

The point is not meta build but variations. If you define everything "working well" as a meta build, I'm promoting Meta-Builds all the way.
Unless you're confident that your skills can compensate whatever, who would like to play a handicapped build after all?

So yea. GO metabuilds GO.

Jun Watarase, on 27 May 2014 - 04:26 PM, said:

Are we rules lawyering about what is legal and not? Because last i checked, this was legal outside of funerals too..

If we have a tournament where meta builds are banned/games played in them not counted, with a better scoring formulae that doesnt encourage timing kill shots and blocking teammates to prevent them from firing, then we might have a better gauge of skill rather than being largely decided by choosing a metabuild. But not like PGI is going to do that so we get these faux tournaments that are like oh look all the winners are using cyber akuma, gee i wonder why?

I can't really see your point there. How is that linked picture related to anything?

Itheseus Nevversan, on 27 May 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

Really? You're insulting his personal life because he does what he can to win a tournament without cheating? Wow completely lacking in class man.

lol it's okay. This guy is using an 14 year old puberty "girlfriend" insult. I wished PGI has a pegi minimum age on mwo, but then again some people are just stuck at a certain metal age.

[Mr D One]

Ithasanass Nevversan, on 27 May 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

Really? You're insulting his personal life because he does what he can to win a tournament without cheating? Wow completely lacking in class man.

Oh come on now, It's just jokes. He probably has thousands of girlfriends being the Meta Champ that he is.

Also like the HSR of SRM's, you have completely missed the point. All I said was that there is no variant of the Victor that has 2 x PPC,s and 2 x AC 5's in the Battletech 3025 and Battletech 3050 field manuals.

All I asked was show me that build in the above manuals and he responded like a 14 year old child with "Meta champs field manual, blah blah blah, sook sook sook, so I responded to it in kind.

It's funny how a "some people are just stuck at a certain mental age" when they make up things when they cant back up a legitimate point, and get overly defensive when the criticism is leveled at an unbalanced game that rewards a certain type of weapon and play style.

[Eglar]

Dar1ng One, on 28 May 2014 - 12:56 AM, said:

Also like the HSR of SRM's, you have completely missed the point. All I said was that there is no variant of the Victor that has 2 x PPC,s and 2 x AC 5's in the Battletech 3025 and Battletech 3050 field manuals.

All I asked was show me that build in the above manuals and he responded like a 14 year old child with "Meta champs field manual, blah blah blah, sook sook sook, so I responded to it in kind.

It's funny how a "some people are just stuck at a certain mental age" when they make up things when they cant back up a legitimate point, and get overly defensive when the criticism is leveled at an unbalanced game that rewards a certain type of weapon and play style.

"legimate point". I wonder if you have been playing this game. You expect that people would play without customizations in a Battletech game when there is a Mechlab? And then you try to enforce your self-imposed rules onto others? LOL! Genius!

oh, regarding TRO3050:

Edited by Eglar, 28 May 2014 - 02:07 AM.

[Mr D One]

Eglar, on 28 May 2014 - 02:06 AM, said:

"legimate point". I wonder if you have been playing this game. You expect that people would play without customizations in a Battletech game when there is a Mechlab? And then you try to enforce your self-imposed rules onto others? LOL! Genius!

oh, regarding TRO3050:

And again you have missed the point.

I really don't give (as the images you posted above) what mech you run and what weapons you use.

As I said, in my first post, in response to Jun, not you, the tagline, "A Battletech game", needs to be removed as it is not.

Now you said my imposed rules would be "genius" but hard point type restrictions have existed since MW4.

We could go back to you know, no restrictions and be like pure battletech. Make up whatever you want and run whatever tech and engine you like.

We could run 6 x PPC stalker, The 5 gauss Annihilator "Gausszilla", have no ghost heat, 325 XL 10 sml pulse hunchie, yknow the good old days of beta.

Me personally I would love to have a jump capable atlas with reactive armor 2 x Snub PPC's LRM Streak 20 and Ultra AC20 but then there is just no balance.

And a good balanced game where any mech is capable of victory is what we want, right?

I understand that your scared of change now that you have won, and congrats too btw, and you don't want the game to change now that you have achieved a system of winning, ie play 13 - 23 games, use Victor AC5 x 2, PPC x 2, adv zoom module to pop tart, cool shot, art stike, hang back and use your fellow pugs as shields while sniping, release art strike if surrounded, rinse and repeat.

I get it, you have a system that works. well done. really.

[Eglar]

Dar1ng One, on 28 May 2014 - 02:30 AM, said:

And again you have missed the point.

I really don't give (as the images you posted above) what mech you run and what weapons you use.

As I said, in my first post, in response to Jun, not you, the tagline, "A Battletech game", needs to be removed as it is not.
Now you said my imposed rules would be "genius" but hard point type restrictions have existed since MW4.
We could go back to you know, no restrictions and be like pure battletech. Make up whatever you want and run whatever tech and engine you like.
We could run 6 x PPC stalker, The 5 gauss Annihilator "Gausszilla", have no ghost heat, 325 XL 10 sml pulse hunchie, yknow the good old days of beta.
Me personally I would love to have a jump capable atlas with reactive armor 2 x Snub PPC's LRM Streak 20 and Ultra AC20 but then there is just no balance.
And a good balanced game where any mech is capable of victory is what we want, right?

I understand that your scared of change now that you have won, and congrats too btw, and you don't want the game to change now that you have achieved a system of winning, ie play 13 - 23 games, use Victor AC5 x 2, PPC x 2, adv zoom module to pop tart, cool shot, art stike, hang back and use your fellow pugs as shields while sniping, release art strike if surrounded, rinse and repeat.

I get it, you have a system that works. well done. really.

If there are so many people, who "don't get your point", then maybe you should present your points in a better way. Game balance has nothing to do with the tournament. If you feel that you drive a mech-configuration which is disadvantaged, then don't do it. Why complain about it. And I hope that you do understand that the Hard-points restrictions for both IS and the comming up Omni mechs were made for the sake of game-balance. Whether they are good or not is not covered by this thread.

Not all weapons are perfectly "balanced" but at the same time I won't drop in a 5xFlamer Locust, run around and say "You guys are all meta *******. Flamers are the only non-meta weapons." And I reckon that you are in a far lower Elo bracket and that you have not seen good players "use people as shields while poptarting" or using Adv. Zoom while poptarting.

For me, Every opponent deserves the absolute best play I can offer and I see no reason to go down onto anyone's level just to mock him. That includes mechs I personally deem powerful, the best stategies I know and the best consumables there is.
The root of this is that some of you are upset you haven't been winning by playing your preferred tactics, and you want the people who have been beating you to be punished for and limited. And yea, people get angry when they lose. So it all comes down to this and you could start with being a better sport and think about what you assume and say, because it's silly.

See I am not defending Metabuilds or the current Game-balance, I am defending "Winning".

Edited by Eglar, 28 May 2014 - 03:13 AM.

[Mr D One]

Eglar, on 28 May 2014 - 03:06 AM, said:

See I am not defending Metabuilds or the current Game-balance, I am defending "Winning".

Wow that was good. You did not use silly graphics or smart arse links to fictional manuals. I appreciate that. And I was not critiquing winning. If that is your primary motivation, then good for you. Mine is fun, since you asked and not assumed.

Do you think your good enough to win the tournament in a stock mech? I know I couldn't. Maybe you could, will you give it a try next tournament? No, because you owe it to your goal of winning and respect to your opponent to bring the best build that suits your play style.

Any way as I was saying, in my original point, which was in response to Juns post, which you have missed as bad as 50 cents baseball toss, is that when you look at the MWO tagline, "A Battletech game", it is not a battle tech game.

That's it, that's my point.

Your not Charlie Sheen in real life are you?

#winning

[ShinVector]

dario03, on 27 May 2014 - 09:11 AM, said:

Is the 4ml, 4mg Ember a metabuild? Not sure if he ran it this tourny but ShinVector said that he ran that last tourny. And in this tourny he took 3rd in Liao, and if I had been Liao I would of been 4th with one less point. (Took 11th in Merc Corps since I was 2 points shy of 10th).

Last tourny I was focusing more on kills on the Ember.
Unforunately this time around I was experimenting more on, getting damage with kills/assists as secondary in the Raven 3L... I was expecting to find more games where I could murder LRM boats... (Only had so so luck with this...)

This is my last game of the tourny, you can fight hard but it doesn't help you get a good enough score when it comes to top 10.

I believe I could have done better if my latency was lower by 50ms... Was at 250ms++ most of the time and it sucked for lasers.

Edited by ShinVector, 28 May 2014 - 04:12 AM.

[wanderer]

Placed just above center in the top 50 again this time.

The differences? I only got one day to play. Didn't use arty. Not even remotely close to "meta" anything either time, mind you. Friends, X-men movie and Memorial Day weekend getaway > giant robots, however. Before I left, I was #1. Fear my cheesy metabuild of dooooom, the Orion-V with two ALRM 15's, an ER LL and dual machineguns. And basic profs. I only had two Orions at that point.

Fortunately, the slot-machine got it's lever pulled enough times by other pilots and 1953 was merely 24th in the end. I have no doubts I'd have top 10'd it if I'd actually hung around all weekend- 2100ish wouldn't have been tough, just a matter of time.

[N E R E V A R]

Dar1ng One, on 28 May 2014 - 12:56 AM, said:

Oh come on now, It's just jokes. He probably has thousands of girlfriends being the Meta Champ that he is.

Also like the HSR of SRM's, you have completely missed the point. All I said was that there is no variant of the Victor that has 2 x PPC,s and 2 x AC 5's in the Battletech 3025 and Battletech 3050 field manuals.

All I asked was show me that build in the above manuals and he responded like a 14 year old child with "Meta champs field manual, blah blah blah, sook sook sook, so I responded to it in kind.

It's funny how a "some people are just stuck at a certain mental age" when they make up things when they cant back up a legitimate point, and get overly defensive when the criticism is leveled at an unbalanced game that rewards a certain type of weapon and play style.

You do know this entire post that you've typed out is completely redundant because you've completely missed the point? This all started when you called him a "hideous looking chud" out of the blue. Look i could care less about your conversation but even if you have a valid point to make, no one is going to listen to you because you're just acting like an arse. Eglar has kept his cool throughout the entire conversation while you just result to immature personal attacks. If you still think that you aren't acting like a twelve year old then there's really nothing anyone can do to help you.

[Kjudoon]

ShinVector, on 28 May 2014 - 04:08 AM, said:

Last tourny I was focusing more on kills on the Ember.
Unforunately this time around I was experimenting more on, getting damage with kills/assists as secondary in the Raven 3L... I was expecting to find more games where I could murder LRM boats... (Only had so so luck with this...)

This is my last game of the tourny, you can fight hard but it doesn't help you get a good enough score when it comes to top 10.

I believe I could have done better if my latency was lower by 50ms... Was at 250ms++ most of the time and it sucked for lasers.

I see you ran into one of our Seraphim's insane light pilots, Lost in Chaos and almost got him... good game. I hate it when he sinks his teeth into me, but love it when he's on my side.

Edited by Kjudoon, 28 May 2014 - 07:11 AM.

[Jun Watarase]

Eglar, on 27 May 2014 - 11:25 PM, said:

The point is not meta build but variations. If you define everything "working well" as a meta build, I'm promoting Meta-Builds all the way.
Unless you're confident that your skills can compensate whatever, who would like to play a handicapped build after all?

So yea. GO metabuilds GO.


I can't really see your point there. How is that linked picture related to anything?


lol it's okay. This guy is using an 14 year old puberty "girlfriend" insult. I wished PGI has a pegi minimum age on mwo, but then again some people are just stuck at a certain metal age.

Saying that anything that works well is a metabuild and is fine is like saying theres nothing wrong with using Akuma or other boss characters in street fighter becaue he's good.

Honestly this argument is basically like two guys arguing about whether a street fighter tournament should have Akuma allowed or not, with one claiming that Akuma is too powerful and makes the tournament pointless and the other saying "nuh uh!". Its not going to go anywhere because the guy who wants to use Akuma will keep insisting it isnt broken so that he gets to use it in the tournament. Its a conflict of interest, no CEO is going to say that hes paid too much obviously.

That picture shows that just because something is legal doesnt mean its acceptable. Which has been a core argument of people claiming they are playing to win, that anything is fine as long as its legal. Actually thats a common argument of sociopaths...like ive said before, bank executives who caused a global financial crisis just insisted they didnt break the legal so it was ok (which most people obviously dont agree with).

Edited by Jun Watarase, 28 May 2014 - 07:43 AM.

[Jun Watarase]

Cimarb, on 27 May 2014 - 04:51 PM, said:

As I posted earlier, it may help if you define what YOU think the definition of a metabuild is.

If a metabuild is PPC/AC, you need to go watch the tournament videos. There were quite a few matches where other builds were used extensively. You also realize that an AC2 and an AC20 are about as different as any other two weapons in the game, right?

For instance, the "10 of one mech" team that you are talking about is a horrible example, both because they lost and because everyone was amazed that they brought that drop deck because it is NOT "the meta" at the level they are playing at.

The drop in weight limit dramatically change the mechs that were bought AND the tactics that were used, as well. Where you saw a lot of assaults in the first round, you saw almost no assaults in the second round. For example, how many Victors did you see in the second round compared to the first?

A metabuild is one that takes advantage of broken game balance to end up with a mech that is impossible to counter without also using a metabuild. Im sure some other people can phrase that better, but that should be enough to give you an idea of it. Why not start a thread on GD asking what a metabuild is if you arent sure?

Theres no way a non metabuild can kill a metabuild all other factors being equal. Just like how Akuma in street fighter walks over every other character in the game.