41 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

well the game modes dont force either team to take action. so theres no reason not to play defensively and poptart.

but what if skirmish had a king-of-the-hill style objective in the middle that funneled both teams to fight in the center? Then you would have to take action or youd lose to cap.

[Atkins0n]

Adiuvo, on 31 May 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

No they aren't.

Dragon Slayers were taken primarily due to force of habit and the Embers were taken, at least on HoL's part, because Wispsy and I enjoy playing them more.

Adi is right, I actually perfer the jenner is almost 90% of the situation, but embers are crazy dps and more efficient on hot maps.

Edited by Tricepticon, 31 May 2014 - 01:24 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Vassago Rain, on 31 May 2014 - 12:19 AM, said:

Let me also comment on the *16 out of 24* cash only robots used in the finals.

wow...can smell the stale cheeze from here.

If that is what it means to be Comp in MWO these days, I'll stick to being a PUGBAD.

Vassago Rain, on 31 May 2014 - 12:29 AM, said:

They are superior to the c-bill variants.

Dragonslayer, for instance, can put all four guns on one side, basically using the other as a shield (sword and board), and the ember gets jumpjets, 4 machineguns, and 4 medium lasers.

sadly, the DS are only superior due to the current meta. Before The shift to ac5s/ppc no one used the DS.

The Ember...yeah, it pretty much IS the premiere FS9. Not even going to try to deny it, even at the risk of getting one of my favorite mechs nerfed.

[Davers]

The first round was fun to watch since the teams played more aggressively and with more diverse builds (builds, not mechs- pretty much the same variants as the rest if the tourney). But the later rounds got increasingly boring. I think the commentators did a good job with it (I am a professional MC by trade and I know how hard it can be to fill in the 'dead air').

But when they were talking about builds and people taking X mech over Y mech, it just felt forced. Like they were trying to add a depth that just isn't there. This is a hill humping and sniping game. Brawls only happen when the snipers fail to focus fire.

Knowing that the current meta is here to stay unless major changes are made to several core systems makes me sad.

[Bishop Steiner]

Adiuvo, on 31 May 2014 - 01:20 PM, said:

No they aren't.

Crimson Straight, due to the lack of hills and the city fighting, would technically be better served by a 733C instead of a Dragon Slayer. The Ember isn't strictly better than the Jenner, they serve two different purposes and the team comps reflect this.

Dragon Slayers were taken primarily due to force of habit and the Embers were taken, at least on HoL's part, because Wispsy and I enjoy playing them more.

The Ember IS strictly better than every other Firestarter though. Without even a remote question. That is what decides the P2W factor, not how it compares to others in it's class, though, the Jenner/Ember debate, in my experience is as much pilot preference as any lack on either side

[Deathlike]

Bishop Steiner, on 31 May 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

The Ember IS strictly better than every other Firestarter though. Without even a remote question. That is what decides the P2W factor, not how it compares to others in it's class, though, the Jenner/Ember debate, in my experience is as much pilot preference as any lack on either side

Currently, the Ember is unique. Until there's a light mech equivalent of its loadout, being called P2W is not as "farfetched" until such a mech is released.

Compared the the Spider-5K, the Ember is far more devastating.

Despite the fact that the Ilya is the only mech that can run a tri-Gauss build, that is a "glass mech"... and it's not hard to counter unless it positions itself well.... until its ammo runs out.

The Ember has no such rival.

Edited by Deathlike, 31 May 2014 - 01:38 PM.

[Khobai]

Wouldve been interesting if PGI enforced a one mech of each type rule.

[cSand]

If the PUGLIFE team makes it in the next tournament, I promise we'll "unboring" it for ya'll

[Kassatsu]

Khobai, on 31 May 2014 - 01:24 PM, said:

well the game modes dont force either team to take action. so theres no reason not to play defensively and poptart.

but what if skirmish had a king-of-the-hill style objective in the middle that funneled both teams to fight in the center? Then you would have to take action or youd lose to cap.

Then it wouldn't be skirmish. It would be king of the hill.

[Khobai]

Quote

Then it wouldn't be skirmish. It would be king of the hill.

Thats fine because skirmish is a bad gamemode.

[Deathlike]

Khobai, on 31 May 2014 - 01:36 PM, said:

Wouldve been interesting if PGI enforced a one mech of each type rule.

You mean no multiple variants of the same chassis?

Light: Spider-5D, Jenner, Raven-3L, Firestarter-A/Ember
Medium: Shadowhawk, Griffin, Centurion, Hunchback-4SP (maybe Wolverine, but I dunno)
Heavy: Cataphract-3D, Thunderbolt-9SE, Quickdraw-5K, Jester
Assault: Atlas-D-DC, Highlander-733C, Victor-9S/DS, Stalker-M/5M

brackets done, ggclose

Edited by Deathlike, 31 May 2014 - 01:43 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

You mean no multiple variants of the same chassis?

Yes, teams might use the same 12 mechs, but at least it wouldnt be 5 Dragon Slayers and 4 Embers.

[Adiuvo]

Bishop Steiner, on 31 May 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

The Ember IS strictly better than every other Firestarter though. Without even a remote question. That is what decides the P2W factor, not how it compares to others in it's class, though, the Jenner/Ember debate, in my experience is as much pilot preference as any lack on either side

Eh... I wouldn't exactly agree with that. The other Firestarters can basically be built the same as a Jenner and it still has the intrinsic benefits of the chassis.

The Ember isn't P2W, but it is P2GetExclusiveOptions. Just because you bring one doesn't mean you'll perform better than your Jenner-F teammate.

[Khobai]

Quote

The Ember isn't P2W, but it is P2GetExclusiveOptions. Just because you bring one doesn't mean you'll perform better than your Jenner-F teammate.

on maps like terra therma or tourmaline you will perform better though.

[Adiuvo]

Khobai, on 31 May 2014 - 01:54 PM, said:

on maps like terra therma or tourmaline you will perform better though.

Likewise on maps like Alpine or Forest Colony a Jenner-F will perform better.

[Khobai]

Quote

Likewise on maps like Alpine or Forest Colony a Jenner-F will perform better.

How so? A firestarter can do just as well on alpine or forest colony as a jenner. But the firestarter has a very real advantage on hot maps due to having four weapons that generate 0 heat.

[Deathlike]

Adiuvo, on 31 May 2014 - 01:51 PM, said:

The Ember isn't P2W, but it is P2GetExclusiveOptions. Just because you bring one doesn't mean you'll perform better than your Jenner-F teammate.

While I wouldn't call the Ember P2W, but the Ember provides options that the Spider-5K doesn't provide... better tools than just 1 ERL/LL/LPL laser to carve the external armor of a mech in order for the MGs to be potent.

Compared to the 6 med Jenner/Firestarter, those have to cool off due to how they normally dish their damage. The Ember has the choice to keep pounding the enemy with their 4MGs (part of their usual loadout) WHILE they cool down, particularly if the opponent has exposed armor. Unlike the Spider-5K, 4 med lasers (more or less standard loadouts for energy heavy lights) is the basic carving tool to make it happen.

Not even 2 MGs on the Firestarter-H/Raven-4X are "enough" to make MGs effective. MGs as currently designed favor 4 MGs minimum for maximum effectiveness for the tonnage used.

Edited by Deathlike, 31 May 2014 - 02:00 PM.

[Adiuvo]

Khobai, on 31 May 2014 - 01:59 PM, said:

How so? A firestarter can do just as well on alpine or forest colony as a jenner. But the firestarter has a very real advantage on hot maps due to having four weapons that generate 0 heat.

Range and peeking capability. The Ember has little of either.

[Davers]

Adiuvo, on 31 May 2014 - 02:00 PM, said:

Range and peeking capability. The Ember has little of either.

How so? Both mechs being discussed are armed with medium lasers, so the range is the same. Both have JJs.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

PGI is always putting the cart ahead of the horse.
Here they put a herculean effort into setting up a tournament and providing observer tools, but the game balance is so atrocious it is the only thing people notice.

Sadly of the problems these video highlight:
P2W mechs (build diversification)
AirStrike/Artillery consumables
Jump Jets
PPCs
Autocannons
Weapon balance and diversity in general (LRMs should be the natural counter to poptarts, fire from safety, and they track opponent to the ground)

And PGI has responded with:
an minor reduction in consumable damage, so now they only do 175% more damage (x10) than the most powerful weapon in the game (down from 200% x10 more damage); at unlimited range.

a range reduction for autocannons, which means on the largest maps they cannot fire across the entire map.

and a sweeping under the rug of P2W mechs, supposedly they may not be allowed in official tournaments in the future. Good to PGI really stepping up to the plate on this Pay-to-Win issue.