

For All The Qq People About Clan Mechs Being Op Or P2W
#1
Posted 19 July 2014 - 10:29 AM
if your getting pummeled and creamed eveytime, your doin it wrong.
i have several IS mechs and clan mechs myself, and i can kill as easily a clan mech with my IS mech as a clan mech can kill an IS mech.
its not pay to win
its not OP
its the pilot that counts for 90% of your score in a match.
so look at yourselves first.
or go back to COD or WOT
#4
Posted 19 July 2014 - 11:23 AM
#5
Posted 19 July 2014 - 02:55 PM
#6
Posted 19 July 2014 - 03:20 PM
#10
Posted 19 July 2014 - 04:57 PM
Vassago Rain, on 19 July 2014 - 03:20 PM, said:
Psst. Hawken has more strategy than MWO right now, just saying. Mainly because the objectives matter and pay better than simply duking it out.
Back to CoD does kinda make sense; the only thing that matters there is hiding in a corner getting your kills to rack up AI that'll get your kills for you to get more AI to do your kills for you to get to the top "like a pro."
#11
Posted 19 July 2014 - 05:00 PM
Wolfways, on 19 July 2014 - 04:53 PM, said:

Actually, due to the way cover works in WoT i find it much more tactical.
I haven't really played that much WoT. I install it from time to time, play a few rounds then stop.
It's fun for what it is, there is no "meta [insert chassis here]".
It is (fairly, somewhat) balanced, and you need alot of skill and patience.
Gotta angle that armor!
And, to me, victory matters in WoT. After 4-6 kills I feel like I did something.
How do you propose MWO could be more tactical?
#12
Posted 19 July 2014 - 05:00 PM
Koniving, on 19 July 2014 - 04:57 PM, said:
Non-combat based objectives do not equate to more strategy.
Effectively killing your opponent requires just as much strategy as completion of any other objective.
#13
Posted 19 July 2014 - 05:08 PM
Roland, on 19 July 2014 - 05:00 PM, said:
Effectively killing your opponent requires just as much strategy as completion of any other objective.
While true. Killing the enemy team in MWO with your team means holding the best spot on the map because no one will go for the base (it actually pays more to commit suicide than it does to take the base. I'm serious).
Meanwhile in the past, we'd have Atlases rushing bases and ignoring enemy forces because the base paid half as much by itself than killing the entire team yourself.
Kill 6 players... or capture the base? With turrets it's not like they'll do it before anyone can react.
Then you have reason to have someone defending the base, to send someone to attack the base, to scout for enemies trying to take your base, a front line to keep the enemy at bay, and a flanking force to wipe out the enemy force.
We'd even have reason to bring lights and mediums. They can get to where they need to be faster to turn the tide of the battle. Their earnings and value just skyrockets when the objective matters.
But when it doesn't like right now, only heavies and assaults matter. All you need is "Take the hill." "Duke it out." "We win."
Edited by Koniving, 19 July 2014 - 05:10 PM.
#14
Posted 19 July 2014 - 05:13 PM
I play skirmish, where the goal is simply killing the opponent... and since you aren't tethered to your base, the outcome is much less determined by spawn. (assuming your team doesn't just derp it up and rush to center simply because.. .derp, rush center!)
#15
Posted 19 July 2014 - 05:15 PM
http://mwomercs.com/...in/page__st__40
the quote being
"sure they are pay to win then, but they arent OP, stronger, but not OP "
Edited by Hobgoblin I, 19 July 2014 - 05:17 PM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users