322 replies to this topic

[Kristov Kerensky]

Sarlic, on 27 February 2015 - 08:04 AM, said:

Thus a invidual game, gg man.
Boating and dropping hardpoints =/= effective.

Which is shocking for such a small community.

Wrong, boating and dropping hardpoints IS effective when it's done right, BTech has examples of that aplenty. Catapults, we got some with multiple weapon systems and some with JUST LRMs, both are good, some are better in some situations, others in different situations.

A good mix of specialists and generalist is the optimal team makeup, too much of either and you get caught out.

[Harrison Kelly]

Sarlic, on 27 February 2015 - 08:04 AM, said:

Thus a invidual game, gg man.
Boating and dropping hardpoints =/= effective.

Which is shocking for such a small community.

If you're going to make that universal statement, I'm going to want to see some proof that boating and dropping hardpoints aren't truly effective.

Here's my evidence that it is.
1) Nearly all of my 'Mechs are built around a primary battery of weapons, with maybe 1-2 backup weapons. It's worked well for me thus far in terms of personal stats. And I'm not even that good at this game, nor do I play a lot of the high-kill builds (e.g. AC40 Jager). I drop hardpoints and boat a fair amount, though not as crazy min-maxed as some of the competitive guys. It works for me, so clearly, anecdotally, it's effective. I suspect you can make the same argument and I don't want to turn this into a stats measuring contest, so . . .
2) Let's go look at competitive builds on MetaMechs. Wow, looks like ALL the competitive builds are boating. Clearly, it's effective, because those guys like winning. If carrying jumbled-up loadouts was the most effective, trust me, they would do it.
3) Thinking with logic here, if I can set up a Mech where I have defined optimal engagement range where all/most of my weapons are effective, and only have to manage 2-3 weapons groups, why would I set up a Mech with no optimal engagement range (at any range, I can't fire all of my weapons effectively) and more weapons groups for equal/lesser reward?

As for your numbered list of reasons of arguments, you keep making statements with no proof. Like "1 LRM 20 is effective enough." Or "You need to learn how to manage more weapons groups." Like, why? Why would I do that when I can do just as well with a simpler control scheme and focused weapons layout? And if you think that putting an Advanced Zoom module on an Assault is a waste of time, well, clearly you have yet to run into a 2x Gauss, 4x CERLL Dire Wolf or 5-6 ERLL Stalker.

You can argue that you LIKE diverse weapons loadouts all you like. I respect that. What you can't do, is prove that it's more effective. Because it's not.

[Dock Steward]

Sarlic, on 27 February 2015 - 03:27 AM, said:

Not saying you should run stock only but i only ask people to run a more variety and try to make use of the available hardpoints. Which alot of people, including you are dropping.

Hardpoints were inflated for this game. They're not meant to all be used. They exist to offer options. I really do not understand your fascination with using all the hardpoints. Even stock builds don't use all their hardpoints!

[Sarlic]

I never said it was ineffective. It's just dissappointing to see that obviosuly people are accepting various wubbee builds and wave it off as a specialist.

What proof you want to see? How can one man make a difference? I can post screenshots of my 'allround' builds but then i get flamed yelled at anyhow. It works for me, but for others perhaps not.

Cut me a break. It's a discussion what is i am getting tired of. The community is divided as how i see, that's not particulary wrong, but rather shocking.

Quote

You can argue that you LIKE diverse weapons loadouts all you like. I respect that. What you can't do, is prove that it's more effective. Because it's not.

But, as others have pointed it out or better said Koniving had a great post about it. The game mechanic itself is als at fault allowing it in the first place.

Quote

And if you think that putting an Advanced Zoom module on an Assault is a waste of time, well, clearly you have yet to run into a 2x Gauss, 4x CERLL Dire Wolf or 5-6 ERLL Stalker.

Oh, believe me i have encounterd these wonderful builds more then you know. What a bunch of specialists.

Edited by Sarlic, 27 February 2015 - 09:21 AM.

[Kristov Kerensky]

Dock Steward, on 27 February 2015 - 08:51 AM, said:

Hardpoints were inflated for this game. They're not meant to all be used. They exist to offer options. I really do not understand your fascination with using all the hardpoints. Even stock builds don't use all their hardpoints!

And I share Dock's not understanding here, since BTech doesn't HAVE hardpoints to begin with. Omnipods are NOT weapon specific devices, they are simply open tonnage/slots per area, that's it. Like MS before them, PGI decided to go with a hardpoint system for..well...supposedly to prevent boating, but since BTech is actually full of boats to begin with, and we can still boat with the hardpoint system, so what exactly was the point of it? Oh, right, no quad gauss/AC20 Dires, which we can build, and no dual gauss Atlases, which we can't build..seems rather messed up there.

Hardpoints are an artificial fix to a problem that doesn't exist except in certain minds since the original game this is based on LOVED to use boat builds. PGI's hardpoint system is arbitrary, since my Atlas DDC has 2 ballistic hardpoints for the single AC20 it carries, what's the logic behind that? Why does my Yen Lo Wang have 2 ballistic slots in the right arm when it also only comes with a single AC20 there? Why does my King Crab 000(L) have 3 ballistic slots per arm when it too only comes with a single AC20 in the arms? It's not even a consistent system.

[Sjorpha]

I haven't read through all the thread, but to answer the title question I think it is quite clear that a builds overall popularity depends on it's perceived strength. You will see more mixed loadouts if more people get convinced they are effective.

Some people, like Sarlic perhaps, will have an approach to the game that makes their perception differ from the norm. If a mixed loadout works best for you then obviously you will use such loadouts more than other people. If you can perform significantly and consistently above the average performance or the "specialists", enough that it starts shaping matches, then more people will want to learn how you do it.

In other words, talking the talk will never change or "diversify" the meta, only walking the walk over enough smouldering metal carcasses will.

I personally think the game is rather diverse as is, so I don't actually share these concerns. There are plenty of mixed very popular loadouts, for example the typical King Crab features AC20s+SRMs+Lasers, all three types of weapons in the game! And this is true for a lot of mechs, though I'll admit that even these builds tend to specialize in either short-medium or medium-long range, but that is unavoidable I think because a short-long range mech will never have full use of it's weapons. I'd also like to point out that boating cannot be construed as unfriendly to lore, because lore is full of boats as well as long or short range focused mechs.

In my opinion specialists is more tactically interesting because they create more role warfare, snipers snipe, brawlers brawl and so on. So I even feel the OPs agenda is contrary to mine, if anything I want to prevent him from succeeding.

[Sarlic]

Still no diversity. Perhaps.....a slight increase? It's something.

GG. So much fun.

Today with a Highlander 3xLL plus a Gauss rifle. Oh wait...I think that's a specialist? People can't deny this is going to screw the game on the long turn if nothing is done by PGI. (Not to mention these new shiny Ebons and Timby with the old same loadouts)

I don't complain much but this is just a thing i can't get over it --> the balance just shifts along.

Edited by Sarlic, 24 June 2015 - 12:15 AM.

[XX Sulla XX]

Sarlic, on 17 February 2015 - 05:34 AM, said:

Obviously alot of people don't want to play or have mixed loadouts.

Just a pick of what i am seeing lately:

• Stalker with only LL. Nothing else.
  
• Direwolfs with only CUAC. Nothing else.
  
• Thunderbolts with ER PPC. Nothing else.
  
• Thunderbolts 5K with only MPLs. Nothing else.
  
• King crabs with only UAC. Nothing else.
  
• Stormcrows with only Streaks. Nothing else.
  
• Firestarters with only SMPLs. Nothing else.
  
• Wolverines with LSMPL. Nothing else.
  
• Maddog with SRMS6. Nothing else.
  
• Cidada with PPCs. Nothing else.
  
• Raven with only ERLL. Nothing else.
  
• Jager with AC40 or Gauss Rilfes. Nothing else.
  
  
  
  
  Pretty sure there is more of this.

Making mixed loadout, making use of the hardpoints layout provided and variety on different ranges are obsoleted or getting rare to see. (Solo que)





I am getting pretty tired of this vomit, wubbee, dakka or you name it.

This is no meta or whatever you may call it. This is 'crap' and has in my opinion nothing to do with customizing at all. With people sharing high alpha builds, dropping hardpoints in order to get the most out of their mech. Or should i say [insert vomit technology] here is something i have been seeing alot more in the game. And it's increasing by the day.

I, for once will speak out loud.

Look, i like to customize as well. And it's a challenge to fill in all the hardpoints you need in order to profit on all ranges. Customising your mech is one of the fun most things ingame. Both making it your mech and outfit personal as it gets. Camo-paint and you're ready to go.
But things change when people are intentionally dropping hardpoints in order to get more 'dakka' or 'vomit'.

Tired of seeing these builds over and over again and shows that people only play as a invidual for getting the highest damage as possible.

That's no build for teamwork.

Nothing wrong with making brawlers and such. You can do that with all hardpoints filled in. Less 'dakka' or 'vomit', but more skillfull and fun. Back in the days of both closed and open beta we had to deal with the same issue. Unfortunatly, this issue still excists because we are still dealing with the same symptoms as we had with the Gauss cats and or PPC's only builds in Closed Beta.

I am talking about a requirement: basic thing of filling all hardpoint prior to launch in battle. Numerous people have tried to brough this subject up multiple times, unfortunatly up to now without any succes. Scrapped the idea.

I am sure plenty of people have discussed about the hardpoints loadout, a better idea for quirking certain mechs etc. Plenty of threads about it. For example Deathlike had a post somewhere with a interesting though on the HPs.

From my original standing, but i removed it after Bishop and Joseph pointed something out which i haven't though of. Therfor scrapped it.


Ofcourse there are some exception on excisting mechs who share high energy points. Or partcular mechs with high BP points.

Resumed: Yababababa
If you think i am whining just about a thing that everyone is 'free' to customize then i would like to tell you how much Thunderbolts only carrying the ERPPCs have you noticed in about the last couple, let's say, about three weeks?

The TDR is not alone in this particular case.

That's right. It's pretty obvious. Because of the quirks the TDR got buffed pretty good which people gladly make use of it. Just because it's so (terrible) good people are even buying the Mech and outfit it with that specific loadout.

"Look at that. My goodness. It has a LRM rack onboard. And a couple of lasers as well!"

"The greenies"
I am sure you have seen some new 'greenies' on your team. You have to carry, you have to learn and adapt, you have to aid and perhaps you have to tank for them. But have you ever noticed that particular 'greenie' is carrying a better loadout for the team then you?

The greenie might not be experienced, but i like his loadout way more then your [insert that vomit] loadout. They learn how to adapt a loadout with all weaponsvariety and ranges. I don't say he or she will be a top damage dealer, but their loadout in a supportive is way better.

Which i now come to the point that people are going for the -best of the best- obvious what's available at the time, which is really a shame actually.

Let me remind you of another example. When the Victor and the Dragon Slayer got introduced. Shortly after these wonderful chassis arrived people began to use to poptart with it. Yes..before you think out loud it was with PPCs.
Because the JJ (or better said Jump Jets) was alot more viable then now. With all the complaints of 'poptarting', PGI decided to adjust the JJ-system (The mechs got later). Which has elimited the poptarting for now.

Pinpoint damage have changed alot the past years. People got faster at it, tons of weaponvalues have been changed and new mechs added and or quirked. Koniving wrote for a excellent example about PP damage.

What happened with actually customising for the better goal; loadout variety. Or better said: a supreme cornerstone for your team. A allround- team supportive build with weapons variety on all ranges?

"My loadout, my game"
I like customizing as much as you do, but i am just here to point out that i am seeing a huge shift in terms of balance and loadouts which is in my eyes just as shameful just as the game mechanics is allowing it. Never ending imbalance. Am i saying that customising should be removed? Ofcourse not. ---> I am here to encourage more variety.

You can play whatever loadout you want. But when you go vomit, wubbee, dakka or you name it, you are playing, in my opinion, as a invidual. You will be missed on certain combat situations.

The solution?
I am no superman, and i do not have a solution ready for this. Boating will happen wether i like it or not but i can guarantee you that you will see more kind of this builds in the future.

The only thing i can hope for that PGI will keep encouraging continue to use quirks to try to reward, encourage more diverse loadouts in various combat situations.

In the end i am not sure how many people think the same as me, but i would like to encourage you to write your opinion, thoughs and perhaps even feedback in this thread.

Thank you for your understanding.

Keep it civilized folks. Appreciated.

Problem is the original game made no sense. In real life designers try and get front loaded pin point damage and boat things.

Thanks why you have tanks with one main gun.


And boating of weapons that are alike.





There is a reason they do not build tanks like teh Vickers A1e1 any more.

Edited by XX Sulla XX, 24 June 2015 - 12:31 AM.

[XX Sulla XX]

By the way I do have the solution for you. Have a stock mech game mode where you get a random mech each game. It will be horrible but you will have forced mixed loadouts and it will be fair in a way.

[Sarlic]

XX Sulla XX, on 24 June 2015 - 12:41 AM, said:

By the way I do have the solution for you. Have a stock mech game mode where you get a random mech each game. It will be horrible but you will have forced mixed loadouts and it will be fair in a way.

Sarcasmn much?

Well anything better then these scrubs carrying the LL / Gauss vomit. It just basically confirmed that these builds or meta, or whatever you call it just shifts along.

No offense, but this is just something i get annoyed about because it's the exact powercreeping and or blatantly dropping HPs we had back in February. as well all these builds.

In all fairness a optimized loadout is different if you mean to strike on either long and close ranges. The Atlas-D is a perfect example of jack of all trades. It can peform. And i don't mean slap each laser on a mech and then think it's mixed...

This aint a thing we have for months. It's something that's running for years.

Look i get that PGI applies half band aid measures. It's questionable. But the quirks arent good either. It has to come from both parties.

Edited by Sarlic, 24 June 2015 - 01:20 AM.

[bad arcade kitty]

i dont really see any reason why mixed loadouts should be forced instead of boating

[Sarlic]

bad arcade kitty, on 24 June 2015 - 01:19 AM, said:

i dont really see any reason why mixed loadouts should be forced instead of boating

I never said that. I would like to see more diversity instead of 20 guys running the same.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

Its like baba diablo3 WW build at a time. You could build there 1000x diferent ones, but if you want to maximaze effect of farming / shooting / damage, you end by the 6x UAC DW here....

you cannot simply put there 6x MGs and get the same result. too much BT lore. But even if you put 1MG=1LL=1Gauss as damage dealer, there still will be better and worse builds.

It is what it is.

[Sarlic]

Titannium, on 24 June 2015 - 01:31 AM, said:

Its like baba diablo3 WW build at a time. You could build there 1000x diferent ones, but if you want to maximaze effect of farming / shooting / damage, you end by the 6x UAC DW here....

you cannot simply put there 6x MGs and get the same result. too much BT lore. But even if you put 1MG=1LL=1Gauss as damage dealer, there still will be better and worse builds.

It is what it is.

Some people have been asking for a feature to fullfill all HPs. Or some kind of system. It looks good on paper but i am not sure if that's the solution. Customising is something that should be there, but you don't want to remove or making it useless.

It will bring other problems while we have something like now isn't good either. Some people will be always powerhungry. I agree.

Edited by Sarlic, 24 June 2015 - 01:40 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Titannium, on 24 June 2015 - 01:31 AM, said:

Its like baba diablo3 WW build at a time. You could build there 1000x diferent ones, but if you want to maximaze effect of farming / shooting / damage, you end by the 6x UAC DW here....

you cannot simply put there 6x MGs and get the same result. too much BT lore. But even if you put 1MG=1LL=1Gauss as damage dealer, there still will be better and worse builds.

It is what it is.

And players who can and cannot make your example build work.

[Joseph Mallan]

bad arcade kitty, on 24 June 2015 - 01:19 AM, said:

i dont really see any reason why mixed loadouts should be forced instead of boating

Not forced so much as be more useful.

I have 22 mechs now. My Jenner and my Locust boat Medium and Small lasers respectively.My Atlas-S boats Mediums(4) and SRM6(3)... If having a mixed load of max # of weapons can be called a boat.

XX Sulla XX, on 24 June 2015 - 12:31 AM, said:

Problem is the original game made no sense. In real life designers try and get front loaded pin point damage and boat things.

Thanks why you have tanks with one main gun.

And a back up weapon. That MG isn't just for show.

[Kubernetes]

I haven't read through the whole thread, but I think people will boat because it works.

Historical analog: battleships and the Dreadnought. Pre-Dreadnoughts carried a variety of big and small guns, the thinking being that big guns were for big stuff at long range and smaller guns for smaller stuff and at close range. A generalist build. Afterwards? All big guns... why waste tonnage on smaller guns when (1) big guns do the job better (2) and at max range and (3) you're going to be escorted by cruisers and destroyers anyway.

In MWO there's little need for a generalist build because you'll never drop with 12 assaults and nothing else. Even then, the chances are pretty slim that all 12 teammates will boat the exact same weapon(s). Why doesn't everyone drop in an ECM mech and carry an LRM rack and an SRM rack and a direct fire weapon? Because chances are that your teammates will provide that diversity. If you were a one man/mech army, sure, carry many different weapons, but that's not MWO. Heck, everyone would drop in a stock Atlas DDC if generalist builds were actually effective.

Battleships were supplanted by aircraft carriers during WWII. Most WWII carriers actually carried a fair number of guns... but postwar carriers dispensed with all direct-fire anti-surface weaponry because it was a waste of tonnage and space. Again, it was more effective just to carry more airplanes (i.e. boat your most effective weapon).

[JustEvil]

XX Sulla XX, on 24 June 2015 - 12:31 AM, said:

Thanks why you have tanks with one main gun, up to 3 machineguns, smoke granade launchers, missile launchers and various ammunition types for each weapon.

FTFY.

[GeistHrafn]

I run my Raven 3L with 3 Meds, SRM 2 and NARC with 1 1/2 tons of ammo in PUG queue. I could sit back and be a sniper, but I much prefer mixing it up, helping with locks for the lrm boats, keeping ecm on the fatties and chasing the occasional light off.
People have shown appreciation for what I do, which i find is rare in the solo queue.
Boating, while perhaps best for some folks individual playstyle, I find pretty boring.

[Speedy Plysitkos]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 June 2015 - 01:53 AM, said:

I have 22 mechs now.

And a back up weapon. That MG isn't just for show.

Sry, you misclicked there. I believe youd like to say, I have 222 mechs. Sry, i dont believe someone with 30k posts, have 22 mechs only.....