83 replies to this topic

[Felicitatem Parco]

Tesunie, on 29 October 2014 - 07:20 PM, said:

Shall we just start to agree then? Mechlab is OP! (Seriously, almost all the issues in this game are caused by the mechlab and customizations. However, I'm not for nor against Mechlab and see it as a vital part of the game.)

• The Mechlab is freaking awesome, and allows various Chassis to change along with the Meta of the time.
  
• The assignment of equipment Hardpoints [and other mounting restrictions] is what identifies a Mech's battlefield capacities.
  
• The default loadout is irrelevant; mounting allowances mean everything.

Therefore: The quirk system should have been a hardpoint/component-oriented system rather than a weapons-specific system. This new quirk system has shoehorned Mechs into particular loadouts. THIS is the fault with the system - it's not the assignment of "Meta builds"... it's the assignment of "builds." It doesn't matter if they chose Meta or non-Meta builds.

The fact that they made build-specific quirks is based on a single-point in time's view of the game (as the OP said), however the point of time chosen is now. That means they will do what they want to mix Meta and TRO. And what they choose is static, as mentioned by the OP. But you really shouldn't be mad at the choices of loadouts they quirked. ​It really doesn't matter WHICH loadout they quirk, because quirking any one, singular loadout is not going to produce as much player satisfaction as buffing an entire component.

Buffing Components will let us have the most fun and creativity with a Mech Variant's new-found powers; it will make me feel like I can play around with this new quirk at my own discretion. Buffing a single loadout is like telling me that any other loadout is not supported by the manufacturer, and will void my warranty.

[UrsusMorologus]

Prosperity Park, on 29 October 2014 - 07:30 PM, said:

This new quirk system has shoehorned Mechs into particular loadouts. THIS is the fault with the system - it's not the assignment of "Meta builds"... it's the assignment of "builds." It doesn't matter if they chose Meta or non-Meta builds.

yes

and if you go off that build your chassis sucks again

[Krivvan]

SpiralFace, on 29 October 2014 - 07:23 PM, said:

Cent's LRM's are great. It has a mid range AC, close range ML's, and long range LRM's. Its pretty much effective at every range in the game which allows it to pump out consistent DPT (Damage per Turn) compared to something like a hunchback that might be great at close range, but is susceptible to being "zoned" by the enemy team fairly easily.

That's the very issue with it. It's effective at every range, which means it's worse than another mech at every range. In a Cent you should have the luxury to be able to decide which range you want to engage at, so being effective at every range is not that big a plus. You die horribly at close range to a light, and you aren't contributing all that much at long range. You want to be the best at a certain range, and maybe acceptable at other ranges.

Not to mention LRMs are rather scarce in tournament play because how easily they are nullified by teams that know what they're doing without the need for ECM.

And I'm talking about MWO, not TT.

Edited by Krivvan, 29 October 2014 - 07:50 PM.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

A dual Gauss K2 is still going to be objectively better than a Dual PPC K2.

despite the quirks.

Nothing is changing except for the "Intended" weapons of the stock loadout getting a bit of extra help. And considering that the "Stock" loadouts are the intended way the mech is to be ran [with the exception of minor refits.] This is A GOOD THING.

Your dual AC20 K2 isn't going to be any worse off than it already is... but the standard PPC K2 is getting some help.

AND THAT IS A GOOD THING.

I'm glad that they based the perks off of the stock loadouts. Because the STOCK LOADOUT WAS THE INTENDED ROLE OF THE MECH!

I'm glad that it doesn't comply with meta, and that it's getting a boost, because as it sits, I already run most of my mechs near stock, and I'm so tired of getting my **** pushed in because you guys have decided that the only way to win is to munchkin your way to the top.

It doesn't matter how good of a pilot I am, how well I can spread the damage around when the go to weapons are Pin Point Front Load Damage anyway.
It doesn't matter that I can make my atlas dance like a ballerina, you'll just come in with some obnoxious 6x SRM6 build and blow a leg off near instantly.

So thank you PGI, for focusing the quirk system around stock builds, as this helps promote these mechs to go back into their intended roles.

[Tesunie]

Prosperity Park, on 29 October 2014 - 07:30 PM, said:

But you really shouldn't be mad at the choices of loadouts they quirked.

BUT, at the same time one has to consider balance of all possible loadouts that can benefit from said generalized hardpoint quirks. A weapon specific quirk produces less "viable builds" (not really, but as we all know people tend to be, they will look for most bang for their "buck"), but will ease overall possible balancing issues later on down the line.

There are goods and bads with every possibility. I do see your point, but I also see the point of how and why PGI decided to do quirks this way. This doesn't mean I agree with their chosen quirks on every specific mech though at the same given time/breath. Neither does this mean I don't understand and agree with parts of your statement as well. You present good points, but I feel that overall it may (depending upon how it's done and meta shifts now and within the future) end up creating additional problems with less overall control of the system.

I also feel that mechs in lore tended to be assigned a role and their weapons complimented that role. To call a mech something it wasn't designed for (in the case of the 1E Locust, it's stock role is light/fast support for scout lances, not a striker unit) ends up creating/giving it quirks that don't benefit it's intended role on the battlefield. Quirks (and I agree with you here) should represent possible builds/roles it may be "good" at preforming through customization/mechlab, but those same quirks should also at the same time relate to it's stock loadout. When some/most/all of those said quirks don't aid it's stock loadout, something feels/seems odd about it.

[Tesunie]

Krivvan, on 29 October 2014 - 07:46 PM, said:

Not to mention LRMs are rather scarce in tournament play because how easily they are nullified by teams that know what they're doing without the need for ECM.

But... I constantly hear how OP LRMs are and stuff...
(LRMs are more situational weapons, and a few on a mech build can be useful. Depends upon how they are used, etc.)

Flash Frame, on 29 October 2014 - 07:54 PM, said:

Nothing is changing except for the "Intended" weapons of the stock loadout getting a bit of extra help. And considering that the "Stock" loadouts are the intended way the mech is to be ran [with the exception of minor refits.] This is A GOOD THING.

...

Actually many of the quirks don't overly help the stock build (as much as a custom build). For example, the K2 gets a lot of large laser (I think it's specific to ERLLs too, but I'd have to check again), when it's default energy weapon are PPCs... It has some energy quirks that help the stock loadout of PPCs, but it's got a larger quirk focus of other energy (laser) weaponry instead, which is part of the OP's remarks. (Though they still do gain some benefit for their stock loadout.)

[UrsusMorologus]

Flash Frame, on 29 October 2014 - 07:54 PM, said:

I'm glad that they based the perks off of the stock loadouts. Because the STOCK LOADOUT WAS THE INTENDED ROLE OF THE MECH!

That would be awesome if there was a stock setup for every potentially useful variation. Instead we get buffs to variations that nobody uses even in pugland because the stock configs are awful.

[Mothykins]

Tesunie, on 29 October 2014 - 08:01 PM, said:

Actually many of the quirks don't overly help the stock build (as much as a custom build). For example, the K2 gets a lot of large laser (I think it's specific to ERLLs too, but I'd have to check again), when it's default energy weapon are PPCs... It has some energy quirks that help the stock loadout of PPCs, but it's got a larger quirk focus of other energy (laser) weaponry instead, which is part of the OP's remarks. (Though they still do gain some benefit for their stock loadout.)

I don't know where you're getting LL from. It's Mediums boy.

Mediums and Ballistics buffs that don't effect the MGs.

[Kjudoon]

UrsusMorologus, on 29 October 2014 - 08:03 PM, said:

That would be awesome if there was a stock setup for every potentially useful variation. Instead we get buffs to variations that nobody uses even in pugland because the stock configs are awful.

"Variations that nobody uses"... That's the point of the buffs. So they DO get used and we get some viable variation in the game instead of meta ballistic cheese all day and night.

Edited by Kjudoon, 29 October 2014 - 08:17 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Kjudoon, on 29 October 2014 - 08:16 PM, said:

"Variations that nobody uses"... That's the point of the buffs. So they DO get used and we get some viable variation in the game instead of meta ballistic cheese all day and night.

The buffs make one singular loadout of a Variant more appealing; It doesn't make the entire variant more appealing. We're buffing the variants to make them in themselves more appealing, right? Then why only buff one particular loadout, especially when that one loadout isn't unique or special compared to what that entire variant has to offer?

Edited by Prosperity Park, 29 October 2014 - 08:19 PM.

[Tesunie]

Cavale, on 29 October 2014 - 08:06 PM, said:

I don't know where you're getting LL from. It's Mediums boy.

Mediums and Ballistics buffs that don't effect the MGs.

My bad... I say "laser" and mistook it as "large"... Still, the K2 is PPCs and 2 med lasers and 2 MGs. The most benefit for the K2 quirks still isn't the big PPCs the stock mech carries, but it's "backup" med lasers instead. Even as a "laser boat" (because people like to maximize), it can only fit in 4 med lasers...

[UrsusMorologus]

Kjudoon, on 29 October 2014 - 08:16 PM, said:

"Variations that nobody uses"... That's the point of the buffs. So they DO get used and we get some viable variation in the game instead of meta ballistic cheese all day and night.

Nobody will use the stock RVN-4X even after buff

[SpiralFace]

Krivvan, on 29 October 2014 - 07:46 PM, said:

That's the very issue with it. It's effective at every range, which means it's worse than another mech at every range. In a Cent you should have the luxury to be able to decide which range you want to engage at, so being effective at every range is not that big a plus. You die horribly at close range to a light, and you aren't contributing all that much at long range. You want to be the best at a certain range, and maybe acceptable at other ranges.

Not to mention LRMs are rather scarce in tournament play because how easily they are nullified by teams that know what they're doing without the need for ECM.

And I'm talking about MWO, not TT.

Not really. As I said, weapons come cheaper then cooling in the TT. So having bracketed fire weapons is not that big of a deal when you only have the cooling capacity to handle firing so many of them.

For a cent, this means that you can use your mid ranged weapon in either long range bracket firing situations, or close range, and utilize your close and long range weapons appropriately for the right situation.

You only have enough cooling to either handle the 10 and the LRM's while on the move, and the MLs or the 10 when you where up close, so this allowed it to stay at effective range no matter where the engagement took place.

Additionally, DPT was a big deal. A hunch back for example could lay down a massive amount of firepower in a single turn, but its speed was "eh" and its range was terrible, which made it to where its presence on the battlefield is rendered completely moot as long as you can give yourself that 7 hexes of space. Now sure, you'll have a few good turns where you will have solid chances to hit with it, but you are working with a frame who's value is entirely dependant on its ability to stay within 6 hexes of range.

The cent doesn't have that issue. At 10 hexes, it can still reliably hit with its AC and its LRM's. At 6 Hexes, it still has all of its weapons that it can bring to bear, and it can do this throughout the entire game. With no worries of being "zoned out" like you can easily do with the hunchback (given its speed not being so good.)

Specialized frames had their place in the TT, but most of the times, they where NOT good overall frames.

An Awesome for example is a HUGELY popular frame in the TT, but it honestly has a pretty terrible damage profile. Victor's and Zeus' had more offensive utility and overall punch through multiple weapon systems that allowed them to be potent with a speed at a more persistent rate. The awesome on the other-hand is slow, has a blind spot where it is essentially a useless mech, is a magnet for rush down decks because of it, and comes in at 200 - 300 Battle points more then the other frames due to both its PPC's, and High cooling rates being just expensive weapons to mount.

Thats not to say that the specialized mechs are "bad." But in TT, Bracketed fire and "soldier" mechs that are effective at all ranges are GOOD mechs in TT because TT is all about DPT. And a hunchback, while it can pack a punch that 1/3rd of the game it can actually do something, is essentially dead weight on every other turn of the game. The centurion on the other hand can produce reliable and accurate fire at all ranges, at all times, and in all different types of engagements. Something that the more specialized mechs simply do not do in TT.

Edited by SpiralFace, 29 October 2014 - 08:49 PM.

[Felicitatem Parco]

UrsusMorologus, on 29 October 2014 - 08:24 PM, said:

Nobody will use the stock RVN-4X even after buff

The Hunchback-4G and -4H quirks are also lacking a grounding in MW:O. The -4H is designed to run an AC/20 with 5ML, and the -4G is only meant to running multiple ballistics that the -4H is incapable of mounting.

This is MW:O, not BT:O.

[Pjwned]

UrsusMorologus, on 29 October 2014 - 07:45 PM, said:

yes

and if you go off that build your chassis sucks again

Give one example where a chassis suddenly sucks again because it doesn't take full benefit from every quirk.

[Kjudoon]

Prosperity Park, on 29 October 2014 - 08:19 PM, said:

The buffs make one singular loadout of a Variant more appealing; It doesn't make the entire variant more appealing. We're buffing the variants to make them in themselves more appealing, right? Then why only buff one particular loadout, especially when that one loadout isn't unique or special compared to what that entire variant has to offer?

I must agree that in the next pass, they look at divorcing quirks from chassis and make 2-4 variants of each chassis so we can have the Brawler A1 and the Support A1. But if they kinda support both builds, it won't be too bad.

[Mothykins]

Pjwned, on 29 October 2014 - 08:39 PM, said:

Give one example where a chassis suddenly sucks again because it doesn't take full benefit from every quirk.

Locust 1V.

That ERLL is disgusting, and actually works out to be faster firing than a Medium (Even recalculated.)

The issue is that as more mechs take quirks, and more are hitting the mark, any outliers will be underpowered comparatively.





Side note, I'd reallly, realllllly like it if part of the EXP tree for each chassis went towards quirking a specific weapons set for said chassis, in an A or B fashion. Not even a Huge quirk, just something to nudge it towards a weapon set. (Also encourages multi of the same chassis = more mech bays = Win for PGI)

[Tesunie]

Cavale, on 29 October 2014 - 08:46 PM, said:

EXP tree

The whole EXP tree needs to be looked at and reworked (anyway)...

[Karl Marlow]

Tesunie, on 29 October 2014 - 06:37 PM, said:

I also feel that some of their "role" defined mechs were a little... off...
For example, I use the Locust 1E (that is the 2 LRM5 version stock, right?) as a light support mech. They have it labled as a skirmisher...

I believe it is the1M variant you are referring to. The 1E has more of a laser setup. 2 ML and 2 SL IIRC.

[Pjwned]

Cavale, on 29 October 2014 - 08:46 PM, said:

Locust 1V.

That ERLL is disgusting, and actually works out to be faster firing than a Medium (Even recalculated.)

The issue is that as more mechs take quirks, and more are hitting the mark, any outliers will be underpowered comparatively.





Side note, I'd reallly, realllllly like it if part of the EXP tree for each chassis went towards quirking a specific weapons set for said chassis, in an A or B fashion. Not even a Huge quirk, just something to nudge it towards a weapon set. (Also encourages multi of the same chassis = more mech bays = Win for PGI)

I'm not seeing how missing out on some ERLL buffs means it suddenly sucks again if you want to use the 1V without a ERLL considering it still partially benefits with any other laser, has stronger legs, better accel & decel, and other buffs for whatever they're worth.

Edited by Pjwned, 29 October 2014 - 09:01 PM.