79 replies to this topic

[Bront]

Shots from poptarts, and you're to blame
Darlin' you give PUGs, a bad name.

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Ultimately, PUGS can be better than you think, if you try to work with them. Sometimes that means going with the flow rather than trying to herd them.

[Jon Gotham]

Sandtiger, on 21 June 2014 - 10:15 PM, said:

Meta Trash builds? Are you referring to imaginative players who utilize their mechs well? You had better clarify, because you have just roused the fighting blood of my ancestors.

I think he means one imaginative player who comes up with something good, then everyone else just copying it because "it's the best" wether it fits them or not.
I think his trash comment refers to the fact that said builds are simply hands down more effective than anything else-I feel he has contempt for that aspect of the game, as do I to a degree. Nothing should be flat out superior in all circumstances.

[Sandtiger]

kamiko kross, on 22 June 2014 - 09:01 PM, said:

I think he means one imaginative player who comes up with something good, then everyone else just copying it because "it's the best" wether it fits them or not.
I think his trash comment refers to the fact that said builds are simply hands down more effective than anything else-I feel he has contempt for that aspect of the game, as do I to a degree. Nothing should be flat out superior in all circumstances.

Ahh your not one of those players who dislikes the clans are you? ~Grins. I can see that. I have always built my Mech the way "I" liked it. My brother and I always discuss what works best for us. So I guess you could say we copy each other, but as far as seeking out the "best" build. That is a fairy tail.
It doesn't matter how you build your Mech, or what you copy. In the end it all comes down to skill. I have seen Ravens and Jenners do more damage than assaults. Simply because the pilot is well... a better pilot. Having "BIG GUNS" doesn't do a damned thing, if you can't shoot straight, or you use craptastic tactics. =]
So you and I are going to have to agree to disagree. I was wrecking clan mechs before I broke down and bought a package. It doesn't matter how they build em. I will always enjoy taking salvage from them ~grins.

[Tim East]

Sandtiger, on 10 July 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

I was wrecking clan mechs before I broke down and bought a package. It doesn't matter how they build em. I will always enjoy taking salvage from them ~grins.

Because warhawks can't turn to save their anything. Heh. Back-cored one in my Locust 3M today. Poor blighter.

[Alaskan Nobody]

Tim East, on 10 July 2014 - 03:03 PM, said:

Because warhawks can't turn to save their anything. Heh. Back-cored one in my Locust 3M today. Poor blighter.

And yet they still turn better than their 15 ton heavier cousins.

[Tim East]

Shar Wolf, on 10 July 2014 - 06:12 PM, said:

And yet they still turn better than their 15 ton heavier cousins.

I've killed a few of those as well, though not as many as I did when it first came out on the test server. People wised up and started driving in packs.

[Jon Gotham]

Sandtiger, on 10 July 2014 - 01:22 PM, said:

Ahh your not one of those players who dislikes the clans are you? ~Grins. I can see that. I have always built my Mech the way "I" liked it. My brother and I always discuss what works best for us. So I guess you could say we copy each other, but as far as seeking out the "best" build. That is a fairy tail.
It doesn't matter how you build your Mech, or what you copy. In the end it all comes down to skill. I have seen Ravens and Jenners do more damage than assaults. Simply because the pilot is well... a better pilot. Having "BIG GUNS" doesn't do a damned thing, if you can't shoot straight, or you use craptastic tactics. =]
So you and I are going to have to agree to disagree. I was wrecking clan mechs before I broke down and bought a package. It doesn't matter how they build em. I will always enjoy taking salvage from them ~grins.

I don't dislike clan mechs. I have several actually. I find them to be fun. My alt is in a clan unit! I don't know where you got the idea I dislike them from.....
Skill only matters when one is MARKEDLY better than the other. If he is in a Timberwolf and you are in a kitfox and you are both near equal skill, bar some insane luck you will lose 99.99% of the time:)
Some mechs do require less skill than others to do well, some of them can compensate for lower skill due to attributes or firepower.
Meta trash is 2ppc+gauss, AC5+ppc etc. Any build that gives an advantage that is so great it's hard to compensate for. A few start using them and the rest of the FOTM crowd start using it because it's "best."

I usually build mechs the way I want to-though with the type of player starting to come through on group queue-I can see my liberal ways ending if I want to win:(

[Turist0AT]

PUGs are the best psychics in the world, that how we win. We read each others minds.

Edited by Turist0AT, 11 July 2014 - 01:04 AM.

[Sandtiger]

kamiko kross, on 10 July 2014 - 08:39 PM, said:

I don't dislike clan mechs. I have several actually. I find them to be fun. My alt is in a clan unit! I don't know where you got the idea I dislike them from.....
Skill only matters when one is MARKEDLY better than the other. If he is in a Timberwolf and you are in a kitfox and you are both near equal skill, bar some insane luck you will lose 99.99% of the time:)
Some mechs do require less skill than others to do well, some of them can compensate for lower skill due to attributes or firepower.
Meta trash is 2ppc+gauss, AC5+ppc etc. Any build that gives an advantage that is so great it's hard to compensate for. A few start using them and the rest of the FOTM crowd start using it because it's "best."

I usually build mechs the way I want to-though with the type of player starting to come through on group queue-I can see my liberal ways ending if I want to win:(

Apologies, I thought when you were speaking about copying builds because they were the best that it had a dual meaning that clan mechs are the best ~grins. Sorry, poor jibe. =]
Not so. A good pilot no matter the load out can utilize his-her Mech to their advantage. My brother for example Ding01 is an excellent shot, and predominantly loves assault Mechs. However, I can run circles around him whether he is in his assault or light. Why, because I play to my Mechs abilities.
He outmatches me five to one in fire power when he is running clanners. Never the less, it doesn't save him. Knowing a mechs vulnerabilities is also a part of being a good pilot. When you know where to hit them, you don't need 60+ firepower. I will "out damage" most players with three medium lasers, and an SRM 4. Well to be honest, there are days when I just cant drive, but most of the time. I have a three to one K-D ratio.
If you would like to test this I am more than happy to demonstrate in a private match with whomever you choose ~grins. Please, don't think me combative, or cocky. I merely want to demonstrate that this is a game of skill, and experience. Now having more punch can help players get lucky if they catch someone unawares, i will admit. But it won't really help in the long run.
I find players who are better pilots than me kicking my trash when I am in an atlas or a daishi by doing something I have never seen before. I think to myself... THAT was bada$$!!! I happen to love it when I have an opponent outgunned and they pull off some maneuver that leaves me in a smoking pile of salvage.
Poptarting, I love it that people can pull it off, but I NEVER utilize it. Why? because I hate being an arial target that is easy to hit. Players often complain about it, and I laugh thinking to myself. "whats the problem, they are slower target that is either going to move up or down. It's easier for me to hit them, then it is for them to hit me" ~grins. Again, it comes down to skill. Not weaponry. I grant you that if they are doing it with ER PPC's or Guass Rifles, etc... and I have all short range weapons it can be frustrating. But that isn't their bad, its mine. Why, because I should have a more balanced load out, and incorporate at least some form of Long Range Weaponry.
I'm almost off my soap box. I want people to realize that this game will never be completely fair. Balance is a fairy tail because their will ALWAYS be better players. People who utilize good tactics, skills, and a combination of their weaponry to their advantage. Which is the way it is supposed to be.
With that being said. That is why I love pick up groups. The diversity is amazing. It's like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going to get, and you have to work together on the fly with complete strangers if you want a victory. You don't know what they have so you have to work with what you get. =]

[Jon Gotham]

Sandtiger, on 11 July 2014 - 06:50 AM, said:

With that being said. That is why I love pick up groups. The diversity is amazing. It's like a box of chocolates. You never know what you are going to get, and you have to work together on the fly with complete strangers if you want a victory. You don't know what they have so you have to work with what you get. =]

We'll have to agree to disagree on the skill issue. I've never been killed by a light whilst driving an assault one on one.
I'm also a disgustingly bad assault pilot. I only need one on target alpha, they need to hit me many,many,many times. You are talking about an opponent that VASTLY outskills the other.
Two players both rated 10/10 for skill.
One is in assault with an alpha of 87.
One is in a light with an alpha of 20.
Assault needs to get lucky once, light needs to get lucky every single time.

Bit anyway, I'm enjoying the pug queue more than ever now since the group queue came in. Much closer games now most of the groups get snaffled into the small group grinder. Solo play has never been better. Ironic for a team game....

[Sandslice]

Tim East, on 10 July 2014 - 03:03 PM, said:

Because warhawks can't turn to save their anything. Heh. Back-cored one in my Locust 3M today. Poor blighter.

A double-basic Warhawk can turn better than an Awesome. Still not enough to get Flatleyed by a Locust, but it's not as bad as that.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Turist0AT, on 11 July 2014 - 12:56 AM, said:

PUGs are the best psychics in the world, that how we win. We read each others minds.

[

Spoiler

img]http://i.imgur.com/gmfuihy.jpg[/img]

Indeed.



Combat Scientists!!!

[Tim East]

Sandslice, on 12 July 2014 - 08:55 PM, said:

Awesome.

'Nuff said.

[Fyrerock]

Lunatech, on 22 May 2014 - 04:57 AM, said:

Not ALL pugs deserve a bad rep.

But most do. Most solo players are terrified that their 100ton walking death machine will get scratched. It gets even worse as the weight decreases. Cowardice (in a video game...wtf) is not the way to win games, as we all know.

Charging the enemy only works if most of the group has weapons that allow them to brawl, it does not work if most of the mechs are set up for mid to long range damage. It gets even worse if the other team has a 4 person premade that all focus on that 100 ton mech when it starts his charge.

[Void Angel]

Praetor Knight, on 12 July 2014 - 10:23 PM, said:

That movie was a crime against Heinlein.

[Void Angel]

Fyrerock, on 16 July 2014 - 07:52 PM, said:

Charging the enemy only works if most of the group has weapons that allow them to brawl, it does not work if most of the mechs are set up for mid to long range damage. It gets even worse if the other team has a 4 person premade that all focus on that 100 ton mech when it starts his charge.

You seem as though you might have fallen prey to a common misconception among players of MWO: that simply being a long-range 'mech means that you can't support a brawler push effectively. This belief causes players using those builds to remain in cover when they see the brawlers start to move - which often causes the brawlers to get their heads caved in.

In reality, when you see the brawlers start to push, you need to pull your long-range 'mech into position to help them - from long range, if possible - because they can't take on the entire enemy team by themselves. If you don't maneuver, the enemy's long-range 'mechs are going to simply stop popping out from behind cover to trade shots with you - and then pour fire into the approaching brawlers. This will stop your brawlers cold, either by suppressing them or killing them outright, and then you're down armor/teammates for no benefit. Moving to support, on the other hand, allows you to suppress the enemy forces and deal damage while the brawlers advance - even if the push fails.

This isn't to say that everyone needs to group up and rush the enemy - there's never just one factor to any tactical decision, and there's times that you need to sit tight and suppress flankers, or when you're just too far away to get there in time. Still, it's important to note that being long-range does not preclude you from being part of a brawler push.

[YueFei]

Void Angel, on 19 July 2014 - 09:38 AM, said:

You seem as though you might have fallen prey to a common misconception among players of MWO: that simply being a long-range 'mech means that you can't support a brawler push effectively. This belief causes players using those builds to remain in cover when they see the brawlers start to move - which often causes the brawlers to get their heads caved in.

In reality, when you see the brawlers start to push, you need to pull your long-range 'mech into position to help them - from long range, if possible - because they can't take on the entire enemy team by themselves. If you don't maneuver, the enemy's long-range 'mechs are going to simply stop popping out from behind cover to trade shots with you - and then pour fire into the approaching brawlers. This will stop your brawlers cold, either by suppressing them or killing them outright, and then you're down armor/teammates for no benefit. Moving to support, on the other hand, allows you to suppress the enemy forces and deal damage while the brawlers advance - even if the push fails.

This isn't to say that everyone needs to group up and rush the enemy - there's never just one factor to any tactical decision, and there's times that you need to sit tight and suppress flankers, or when you're just too far away to get there in time. Still, it's important to note that being long-range does not preclude you from being part of a brawler push.

I wish I could like this more than once.

Even if a push is a bad idea, if you're in the area, it usually makes sense to support it by rounding the corner afterwards and pouring in some fire. If it turns out to be a bad idea, well, your teammate is going to get hit first anyways, not you. At least you can get some damage in so it's not as bad of a trade, and since they're all shooting your teammate, you'll have time to bail out anyways.

[RagingOyster]

Belorion, on 18 May 2014 - 08:06 AM, said:

Your premise doesn't make sense. If anyone should be directing the strat for the drop it should be the 4 man, so at that point shouldn't the pugs be going along with what the 4 man is doing?

Problem is many 4-man groups simply don't talk to anyone. They are probably in TS discussing their own strategy, and they don;t bother to type or communicate to the other players at all, leaving us with one lance that runs off and does its own thing while the other 2 lances either try to follow them around or try to formulate a strategy among themselves

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Void Angel, on 19 July 2014 - 09:29 AM, said:

That movie was a crime against Heinlein.

I agree, but I'm able to separate his work, from the work of Mr. Verhoeven to appreciate both differently in the different mediums.

I mean that, I can at least appreciate what Verhoeven was trying to comment on, using Heinlein's work; on what seemed to be a shoe-string budget at the time. I just hope that Starship Troopers can do Heinlein more justice in the future in the hands of others; guys like Chris Nolan, Joss Whedon and Peter Jackson give me hope that Heinlein's ideas can be re-explored and expanded upon in the future.

For example, I've been a Batman fan for a long time, and didn't like the Tim Burton / Frank Miller take(s), and was glad that Chris Nolan brought that story back in a new direction. I hope I'm explaining myself properly since I rarely put such thoughts to words and thus am rusty.

[Void Angel]

Except the movie was bad, too. But I get what you're saying - I didn't dislike the Tim Burton movies, but the most recent trilogy was simply superb.

Do not get me started on the travesty that is Peter Jackson's treatment of Tolkien, however...