17 replies to this topic

[Hit the Deck]

... is because it looks good and not boring! No giant robot in movies etc. boats a certain weapon system! That would be funny but not in a good way.

In order to encourage mixed loadout, the case rests solely on the hands of PGI. I'm sure several nice ideas have been mentioned before a million times like, reworking the heat mechanism or introducing more game objectives, vehicles and infantries, etc etc....

As for my reply to Sarlic's original thread, you should make a build that is as effective as possible for a certain robot, which includes boating. I'm sure you guys know that this doesn't mean boating is always the prefered way to make a good build but usually one or two weapon systems takes the cake. In MWO.

Edited by Hit the Deck, 27 February 2015 - 08:07 AM.

[FupDup]

Define "mixed" loadout.


If you mean something like having some SRMs, Medium Lasers, and maybe throw on some kind of long range gun, such builds are already decently effective, at least in Puglandia where you can't predict what will happen.

If you mean something like having an SRM2, LB 10-X, Flamer, Medium Pulse Laser, LRM15, Large Laser, and 2 Machine Guns, such builds will absolutely never be effective unless we systematically annihilated every single possible build that carries more than one of the same weapon type.

[mogs01gt]

Hit the Deck, on 27 February 2015 - 06:23 AM, said:

... is because it looks good and not boring! No giant robot in movies etc. boats a certain weapon system! That would be funny but not in a good way.In order to encourage mixed loadout, the case rests solely on the hands of PGI. I'm sure several nice ideas have been mentioned before a million times like, reworking the heat mechanism or introducing more game objectives, vehicles and infantries, etc etc....As for my reply to Sarlic's original thread, you should make a build that is as efficient as possible for a certain robot, which includes boating. I'm sure you guys know that this doesn't mean boating is always the prefered way to make a good build but usually one or two weapon systems takes the cake. In MWO.

You need to be more specific on what you are ranting about. Some chassis are designed to boat and others are designed to be a mixed bag of tricks. The issue with specialized/boat builds, is that they are typically team dependent. When PUG'ing, team dependent builds are extremely feast or famine.

[Creovex]

mogs01gt, on 27 February 2015 - 06:34 AM, said:

Some chassis are designed to boat and others are designed to be a mixed bag of tricks.

Spot on ^^^. So OP, what is the point of this thread?

[Hit the Deck]

FupDup, on 27 February 2015 - 06:26 AM, said:

Define "mixed" loadout.


If you mean something like having some SRMs, Medium Lasers, and maybe throw on some kind of long range gun, such builds are already decently effective, at least in Puglandia where you can't predict what will happen.

If you mean something like having an SRM2, LB 10-X, Flamer, Medium Pulse Laser, LRM15, Large Laser, and 2 Machine Guns, such builds will absolutely never be effective unless we systematically annihilated every single possible build that carries more than one of the same weapon type.

Your first example is a good one which can work in MWO and actually, I reconfigured my SCR-D to carry an LBX-10, SRMs, and ERMLs, as opposed to just SRMs and SPLs although this is more effective, because it's now funner and looks cooler. Your second example maybe could work in TT with a certain setting but I don't know. But somethingfor sure, I don't encourage people to make bad builds with mixed weapon loadout. I'll talk about this below.

mogs01gt, on 27 February 2015 - 06:34 AM, said:

You need to be more specific on what you are ranting about. Some chassis are designed to boat and others are designed to be a mixed bag of tricks. The issue with specialized/boat builds, is that they are typically team dependent. When PUG'ing, team dependent builds are extremely feast or famine.

Creovex, on 27 February 2015 - 06:43 AM, said:

Spot on ^^^. So OP, what is the point of this thread?

The point is, I basically agree with some people who promote non-boating because I like to see a mech equipped with different kinds of weapons because it just looks cool. And when I read the TROs, more often than not the mechs are configured so that they can engange the enemies at various ranges and in order to do this, they carry different kinds of weapons to do the job. I'll take the Highlander again (Gauss, medium laser, LRM and SRM), like has been mentioned several times before, as an example because it's also one of my favourite . When you think about giant robots and building one for the first time, I guess you would think to equip it with different kind of weapons with the purpose so that it can adapt to various situations (that MWO lacks). But I guess Highlander is a bad example because its hardpoints don't lend particularly good to boating but Nova's, for example, do. So mogs01gt is right about that. For these laser boats though, I do agree with the idea that they should chain fire their weapon because of heat limit.

So basically: Stock mechs are cool (OMG it has a small laser and machine guns!), mechs with mixed weapon loadouts are cool, and chain firing is cool. But PGI has to make it happen!

[mogs01gt]

Hit the Deck, on 27 February 2015 - 09:03 AM, said:

Your first example is a good one which can work in MWO and actually, I reconfigured my SCR-D to carry an LBX-10, SRMs, and ERMLs, as opposed to just SRMs and SPLs although this is more effective, because it's now funner and looks cooler. Your second example maybe could work in TT with a certain setting but I don't know. But somethingfor sure, I don't encourage people to make bad builds with mixed weapon loadout. I'll talk about this below.



The point is, I basically agree with some people who promote non-boating because I like to see a mech equipped with different kinds of weapons because it just looks cool. And when I read the TROs, more often than not the mechs are configured so that they can engange the enemies at various ranges and in order to do this, they carry different kinds of weapons to do the job. I'll take the Highlander again (Gauss, medium laser, LRM and SRM), like has been mentioned several times before, as an example because it's also one of my favourite . When you think about giant robots and building one for the first time, I guess you would think to equip it with different kind of weapons with the purpose so that it can adapt to various situations (that MWO lacks). But I guess Highlander is a bad example because its hardpoints don't lend particularly good to boating but Nova's, for example, do. So mogs01gt is right about that. For these laser boats though, I do agree with the idea that they should chain fire their weapon because of heat limit.

So basically: Stock mechs are cool (OMG it has a small laser and machine guns!), mechs with mixed weapon loadouts are cool, and chain firing is cool. But PGI has to make it happen!

I think you are directing your concern with mechs such as the DWF boating 3 Gauss rifles. The DFW is not really designed to boat Gauss rifles but its hardpoints and tonnage allows it. The build as a whole sucks ass but if your team functions well enough to allow the tri-gauss DWF to lay down large alphas, it works.

Then there are the Jager's of the MWO world that it's soul purpose is to boat ballistics.

Edited by mogs01gt, 27 February 2015 - 09:18 AM.

[Hit the Deck]

mogs01gt, on 27 February 2015 - 09:17 AM, said:

I think you are directing your concern with mechs such as the DWF boating 3 Gauss rifles. The DFW is not really designed to boat Gauss rifles but its hardpoints and tonnage allows it. The build as a whole sucks ass but if your team functions well enough to allow the tri-gauss DWF to lay down large alphas, it works.

Then there are the Jager's of the MWO world that it's soul purpose is to boat ballistics.

I think that's more in line with Sarlic's concern about people boating certain weapons just for getting high alpha and/or killing blow with their role as a team player stands in the second place. Of course if their build works when the stars align in the PUG land, their contribution are enormous. But getting for the kill is actually their main concern.

I'm more like, PGI please make it so that people have a reason to, or should, bring different kind of weapons because it's fun and cool. In the case of the DWF, I think they have done well to introduce the Gauss charge mechanic. It now has a certain weakness that in brawling range, they aren't that effective (but can be mitigated by skill) and it introduces the need to bring back up weapons.

Hmm, yeah I like Jäger gun boats! Especially when they are firing their weapons. Sometimes I am a bit biased

Edited by Hit the Deck, 27 February 2015 - 09:49 AM.

[Vassago Rain]

Hit the Deck, on 27 February 2015 - 06:23 AM, said:

... is because it looks good and not boring! No giant robot in movies etc. boats a certain weapon system! That would be funny but not in a good way.

In order to encourage mixed loadout, the case rests solely on the hands of PGI. I'm sure several nice ideas have been mentioned before a million times like, reworking the heat mechanism or introducing more game objectives, vehicles and infantries, etc etc....

As for my reply to Sarlic's original thread, you should make a build that is as effective as possible for a certain robot, which includes boating. I'm sure you guys know that this doesn't mean boating is always the prefered way to make a good build but usually one or two weapon systems takes the cake. In MWO.

But all the hero robots always boat their weapons.
Even fantasy robots like escaflowne boats a big sword.

[Deathlike]

Here's a simple thought..

If mixed loadouts worked better, you'd see more at higher levels of play.

The fact that they generally DO NOT says how ineffective that is and the gameplay/builds reflect that.

If that wasn't common sense, I'd like to know what frankenmech build is so superior that it demands our attention.

[Lightfoot]

When the weapons work correctly, and they don't now with anything long range heavily nerfed, mixed loadouts are always best. For MWO you better be weighted for brawling with a long range option.

Anyway boats concentrate one weakness, Heat, Weight, or Size and do lower DPS than mixed loadouts that balance the three weaknesses of the three weapon types.

[ROSS-128]

While nobody is saying that you absolutely must only use a single weapon, a mech that is built with a unified purpose will always perform far better at that purpose than a mech that scatters its damage across a dozen different roles by trying to do everything at once. By relying on your team to fill the roles you are less capable of, you are able to each play to your strengths to maximize your efficiency.

For example, MLs, SRMs, and AC20s go well together because they're all effective in roughly the same range bracket. AC20s and LRMs do not because they contradict each other, you cannot effectively bring them both to bear on the same target.

LLs work better with AC5s than AC20s, because their range brackets are closer together and the lighter AC5s leave more weight to use on LLs. MLs can complement LLs despite their difference in range brackets, because MLs are light, only take up one slot, and they're both lasers.

Mixing ballistic calibers is usually a bad idea, because you'd have to carry a different ammo type for each one and their different velocities would make it difficult to hit. Mixing LRMs and SRMs is a bad idea, because again different ammo types and they cannot engage the same targets.

Mixing different sizes of LRMs with each other, or different sizes of SRMs with each other, (usually to fit your hardpoint tubes) can work because all the missiles have the same firing characteristics and share a single ammo pool. Whether you do so or not is usually dictated by your chassis, namely how many tubes you can fit and how much weight you have to spare.

And if a mech's chassis is built to boat effectively, for example, the BNC-3M with its eight energy hardpoints, five of which have excellent shoulder placement, then there is no reason not to take full advantage of that capacity.

[Hit the Deck]

Deathlike, on 27 February 2015 - 09:58 AM, said:

Here's a simple thought..

If mixed loadouts worked better, you'd see more at higher levels of play.

The fact that they generally DO NOT says how ineffective that is and the gameplay/builds reflect that.

If that wasn't common sense, I'd like to know what frankenmech build is so superior that it demands our attention.

Actually, I'm rather surprised because it seems that you, who on some occasions have made several detailed threads about certain topics, didn't read my post.

Anyway, it should be clear that my concern is not about competitive gameplay, rather than because I like the idea of mixed loadout because it's just cool and not boring. Were PGI to decide to revamp the system, we can then talk about the new competitive gameplay which I no doubt would more be interested in

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

FupDup, on 27 February 2015 - 06:26 AM, said:

Define "mixed" loadout. If you mean something like having some SRMs, Medium Lasers, and maybe throw on some kind of long range gun, such builds are already decently effective, at least in Puglandia where you can't predict what will happen. If you mean something like having an SRM2, LB 10-X, Flamer, Medium Pulse Laser, LRM15, Large Laser, and 2 Machine Guns, such builds will absolutely never be effective unless we systematically annihilated every single possible build that carries more than one of the same weapon type.

You want a good feel of a mixed loadout, the stock AS7-D.

it's not that hard to figure out the mechs that are intended to be run these ways, while it's not usually optimal, they can be utilized to great effect.

[Lightfoot]

I always prefer the challenge of a heavy or medium. Assaults are challenging to be sure, but the lighter mechs are more for me. Harder to get a mixed loadout working though.

Edited by Lightfoot, 27 February 2015 - 09:23 PM.

[Deathlike]

Hit the Deck, on 27 February 2015 - 06:12 PM, said:

Actually, I'm rather surprised because it seems that you, who on some occasions have made several detailed threads about certain topics, didn't read my post.

I actually did, but your proposed solution doesn't honestly solve the problem. It has a bit more to do the the weapon subsystems where LRMs aren't "fire and forget" (the kinds of silly discussions points that many repeat and are completely wrong about - Streaks are "fire and forget") and it doesn't lend to the kind of gameplay that people were used to in MW2, MW3, and MW4. Since we don't honestly have PvE elements (killing the MFB in a Counter Attack doesn't honestly qualify), the value is diminished quite a bit.

Quote

Anyway, it should be clear that my concern is not about competitive gameplay, rather than because I like the idea of mixed loadout because it's just cool and not boring. Were PGI to decide to revamp the system, we can then talk about the new competitive gameplay which I no doubt would more be interested in

It's less about competitive gameplay that I'm concerned about... it's synergy that is more important. When weapons don't synergize well together, then it isn't a combination that gets considered. LPL and Medium Lasers (and their Clan equivalents) have really good synergy. There used to be better synergy between PPCs+ACs (and to an extent Gauss). Natural building combinations tend to be born from good building designs and thus consequently that methodology get applied across the board (as much as reasonably possible).

Medium Lasers and AC20s have natural synergy (range) despite having totally different functions.

I'm sure there are more examples, but that's how it has worked in terms of good building policies.

[Bishop Steiner]

FupDup, on 27 February 2015 - 06:26 AM, said:

Define "mixed" loadout.


If you mean something like having some SRMs, Medium Lasers, and maybe throw on some kind of long range gun, such builds are already decently effective, at least in Puglandia where you can't predict what will happen.

If you mean something like having an SRM2, LB 10-X, Flamer, Medium Pulse Laser, LRM15, Large Laser, and 2 Machine Guns, such builds will absolutely never be effective unless we systematically annihilated every single possible build that carries more than one of the same weapon type.

Boats and Specialization are great for team play. Potential problem in Solo queue. Me? I like the Chaos of solo, as I know I can't rely on anyone else, so I don't really try.

Team play, in a lot of ways, is too easy, and even to an extent, if I live or die, is up to the Team Leader, not me (I'll hold til I die if it benefits the team). PUGLand is all about me, and how prepared I am. It's funny to me how many of the 1337s I see disparage Solo queue achievements, are also not coincidentally among the first to die whenever I do see them play Solo. Mind you, there are exceptions, but the number of people who are only "good" because they have teammates to watch their back and cover their builds weaknesses, is staggering.

It's just one more reason I hope we never get to choose our Maps, etc. Just going to see people Map Camp the coolest maps so they can run their minmax alphaboats easier.

I am all for diverse loadouts, but recognize that really they are more suited for Pug play than team. Would like to see some way to encourage more "traditional" loadouts in CW; etc, but not gonna hold my breath.

[mike29tw]

Hit the Deck, on 27 February 2015 - 06:12 PM, said:

Actually, I'm rather surprised because it seems that you, who on some occasions have made several detailed threads about certain topics, didn't read my post.

Anyway, it should be clear that my concern is not about competitive gameplay, rather than because I like the idea of mixed loadout because it's just cool and not boring. Were PGI to decide to revamp the system, we can then talk about the new competitive gameplay which I no doubt would more be interested in

So this is not a "Frankenmechs are better" thread, this is a "PGI plz change the game so everyone has to play it my way" thread?

[kapusta11]

There is no point in mixed loadouts, weapon A does not excel in it's role and thus better than weapon B, it's either straight up better or straight up worse, there is no crit seeking in MWO, no weapon damage types, no armor types no AP ammo or tandem-charge missiles, etc. There is no actual incetive to use mixed loadouts.

Edited by kapusta11, 28 February 2015 - 08:02 AM.