9 replies to this topic

[orcrist86]

I've been watching the threads and looking at the anecdotal screenies from the lates round of IS VS Clan matchings and I want to throw out a couple of thoughts for the experts to comment on.

Much of the argument centers around 4 key areas: XL Engine vulnerability, DPS vs FLD, Weapon to tonnage ratio, and hitbox favorability/ design.

The current meta of high risk IS mechs designed to deliver max FLD to each other works for IS on IS battles. It is partially effective against the clans, save for the weakness of the XL engine.

The new meta in fighting the Clans may be fld loadouts the eschew XL engines in favor of survivability, countering the DPS nature of most Clan builds. A clan FLD build becomes less effective against a non-XL build, especially as favorable hitboxes work toward IS swivel jockey's.

In my mind this is going to result in a competing set of Meta's. CW will then benefit from pilots that specialize in builds and tactics that are effective against IS or Clan foes, but not both.

It's possible I'm misreading things, but I suspect this will be the case in the long run. I wish I could get more in depth on the 4 areas and how they differentiate clan and IS but my MBA class is calling.

Thoughts?

[Sephlock]

Won't switching to STD engines make it harder to steptart?

[orcrist86]

Sephlock, on 06 August 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

Won't switching to STD engines make it harder to steptart?

Tarting is about piloting, and partially about weapon position on the mech Hill humping and tarting survive despite tonnage.

[Noth]

Sephlock, on 06 August 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:

Won't switching to STD engines make it harder to steptart?

Pretty sure most meta builds already use std engines

[orcrist86]

My meta shadow hawk disagrees. But keep in mind that the current meta isn't the one that we will see down the line. I'm thinking that the meta will evolve a bit. It may not. It's hard to predict, but I still think wee will see two different methods for building, and piloting mechs in response to having two different types of battlefronts.

[Sephlock]

orcrist86, on 06 August 2014 - 07:32 PM, said:

My meta shadow hawk disagrees. But keep in mind that the current meta isn't the one that we will see down the line. I'm thinking that the meta will evolve a bit. It may not. It's hard to predict, but I still think wee will see two different methods for building, and piloting mechs in response to having two different types of battlefronts.

I predict that pilots will follow the FLD gravy train until PGI removes it altogether (unlikely).

[InspectorG]

Well...


Clan xl + weapons range vs IS FL PPD appears to be the main contention.

Plus smaller variables: map composition should we get new ones(a very small map should favor IS, vice versa), heat vs damage output, clan center torso hit box vs IS FL PPD, weapon cooldown times, symmetric vs asymmetric loadouts, etc.

I dont know if the comp players have determined a meta of: clan vs is, clan vs clan, mix vs mix, yet.
May take a year for it to formulate, maybe some tournaments.

But IF we do get CW/more game modes/stock mode, a lot of this may be thrown out the window.

I think as far as my underhive pug experience has shown me: skill is the biggest determiner(solo and group)

[3rdworld]

Noth, on 06 August 2014 - 07:21 PM, said:

Pretty sure most meta builds already use std engines

No....they don't.

Speed + JJs.

Edited by 3rdworld, 06 August 2014 - 07:52 PM.

[Noth]

3rdworld, on 06 August 2014 - 07:51 PM, said:

No....they don't.

Speed + JJs.

Everytime I watch competitive matches they are majority std engine mechs when they are IS.

[Armament]

Noth, on 06 August 2014 - 07:59 PM, said:

Everytime I watch competitive matches they are majority std engine mechs when they are IS.

Speed is life in a meta hawk, you can't reposition or poke fast enough with a standard engine. Same goes for the Victor.