268 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Ultimatum X, on 15 March 2015 - 12:11 PM, said:

You mean the 2K, really. The one with 3 head level mounted energy hardpoints that people put 3x LLAS/ERLLAS in.


If the GRH had 3 head level energy hardpoints, I promise I'd be singing a very different tune.





And yet compare it to the Enf.

I find Griffins much easier to both kill and die in than the Enforcers, which consistently surprise me with their resilience.

Aim better?

Also, just because the 2K is the Mech of the Month" Meta mech? Doesn't suddenly make the other Shads somehow bad. I've always run my 2D2 as a skirmisher, not a poptart, and it's pretty much just as effective now as it ever has been.

That's why I can't agree with you much on anything...if it's not a top 2 percentile meta-mech or build, you relegate it to the bottom of the heap, ignoring the fact that it is still in the top 10% of it's class, and just didnp't need to be as metawhored because it's toughness and versatility already make it dangerous.

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 March 2015 - 12:16 PM, said:

That's why I can't agree with you much on anything...if it's not a top 2 percentile meta-mech or build, you relegate it to the bottom of the heap, ignoring the fact that it is still in the top 10% of it's class,

No dude, I'm looking for a few IS heavy mechs that can actually keep pace with my collection of superior clan mechs.


Because I like variety.




I have a feeling that on the 17th I'll probably be playing the Summoner more than the Grasshopper.

If it even gets halfway decent quirks, it is going to be the better mech in largely a similar role/playstyle except it will likely be faster, more agile, more survivable and with access to better superior lasers.


Maybe two months from now the GRH's quirks will be revamped and it might become interesting.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 15 March 2015 - 12:25 PM.

[hybrid black]

Ultimatum X, on 15 March 2015 - 12:02 PM, said:

My logic is that the game is different.

Pop-tarting with a Shadowhawk was possible.

Asymmetric builds with ACs & PPCs were possible.

High mounted weapon hardpoints make for good snipers.


The Shadowhawk is tall, but it is not as wide as the Victor.



The Grasshopper is in the era of hoverjets.

It won't even be able to combine ACs with PPCs if that ever becomes a thing again.

Many builds will not be asymmetric (laser boating).

I has no primary weapon systems mounted high, only the one slot missile hardpoint in the head.




Logic tells me that the Grasshopper is going to be too large for it's own good.

It's going to be like Sparky vs. Enforcer. Take a look at how wildly different their scaling is, the Enforcer is easily the more survivable of the two.

sooo its in the same place as the timber got it......................

[Bishop Steiner]

Ultimatum X, on 15 March 2015 - 12:25 PM, said:

No dude, I'm looking for a few IS heavy mechs that can actually keep pace with my collection of superior clan mechs.


Because I like variety.




I have a feeling that on the 17th I'll probably be playing the Summoner more than the Grasshopper.

If it even gets halfway decent quirks, it is going to be the better mech in largely a similar role/playstyle except it will likely be faster, more agile, more survivable and with access to better superior lasers.


Maybe two months from now the GRH's quirks will be revamped and it might become interesting.

and thus quirks become the self fulfilling metawhore prophecy sounder minds feared they would be. INstead of elevating multiple mechs to usefulness, they will either reinforce or simply become the new meta, and thus continue to relegate the majority of mechs to obscurity.

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 March 2015 - 12:31 PM, said:

and thus quirks become the self fulfilling metawhore prophecy sounder minds feared they would be. INstead of elevating multiple mechs to usefulness, they will either reinforce or simply become the new meta, and thus continue to relegate the majority of mechs to obscurity.

What are you even talking about?

When you type things like this it tells me you don't really understand what the word "meta" means, nor how having quirks push mechs towards a variety of builds can keep the meta from being stale or dominated by a single build design/tactic.


There is always a meta of some kind, the important part is that there are counters for different builds and tactics so that the meta is a diverse ecosystem of playstyles and tactics.



Quirks exist to BALANCE mechs against one another, the GRH quirks look like they will not do this.



Lastly try and be a big boy, you don't need to resort to name calling the instant anyone disagrees with you.

All that does is show your immaturity.

[Burktross]

This isn't going to end well, is it.

[Juodas Varnas]

Burktross, on 15 March 2015 - 12:44 PM, said:

This isn't going to end well, is it.

It never does.

[Bishop Steiner]

Ultimatum X, on 15 March 2015 - 12:39 PM, said:

What are you even talking about?

When you type things like this it tells me you don't really understand what the word "meta" means, nor how having quirks push mechs towards a variety of builds can keep the meta from being stale or dominated by a single build design/tactic.


There is always a meta of some kind, the important part is that there are counters for different builds and tactics so that the meta is a diverse ecosystem of playstyles and tactics.



Quirks exist to BALANCE mechs against one another, the GRH quirks look like they will not do this.



Lastly try and be a big boy, you don't need to resort to name calling the instant anyone disagrees with you.

All that does is show your immaturity.

yawn. Whatever.

***** a soft spot, eh?

Funnily enough, I disagree with a lot of people. Name call very seldom. If you are feeling pricked by the term metawhore, perhaps that's a you problem.

And no, I understand the term "meta" as it has been misapplied largely among gamers for some time, just fine.

[Burktross]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 March 2015 - 12:31 PM, said:

and thus quirks become the self fulfilling metawhore prophecy sounder minds feared they would be. INstead of elevating multiple mechs to usefulness, they will either reinforce or simply become the new meta, and thus continue to relegate the majority of mechs to obscurity.

I don't think quirks will be enough to make Summoner meta
Good maybe, but meta no.

[Bishop Steiner]

Burktross, on 15 March 2015 - 12:56 PM, said:

I don't think quirks will be enough to make Summoner meta
Good maybe, but meta no.

Oh, I agree, and when it doesn't stand up to the Meta, it will get tossed to the pile and declared crap still, along with the rest that are not "Comp Approved".

[Burktross]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 March 2015 - 12:58 PM, said:

Oh, I agree, and when it doesn't stand up to the Meta, it will get tossed to the pile and declared crap still, along with the rest that are not "Comp Approved".

Nothing could possibly change that. Even in the top "comp" games like CS:GO, some guns are considered ****, for one reason or another. Maybe I'm just ignorant because I don't try to do competitive matches or hardcore premades, and as such lurk in solo, but quirks are good when applied rationally.
AKA, not Thunderbolts. Vindicator 1R, Cicada 3C, and Panther quirks I consider reasonable.

[Creovex]

Vassago Rain, on 15 March 2015 - 12:13 PM, said:

But I've never said those things. I don't care about ghost heat, ECM, LRMs, or any of the other popular problems.

My issues are with PGI the company, their business model, and management. That's why I've given them no money since 2012. Whenever I'm tempted, threads like this happen, and I'm reminded of why I don't pay for stuff in MWO.

I don't know, man. You guys wanna keep throwing money into the pit, feel free, but don't be surprised when others mock you, or you keep receiving poor, rushed products.

More proof it's about your ego and less about the game.... Rain, my retort is to hybrid black about DarthBane001(NOT YOU).... let your ego rest..... hyper defensive is a good description for you.

[XX Sulla XX]

Comparing things only from height is never going to give you a true idea of if they are scaled correctly. What would work best would be if you go into the game files and get the 3d model. Then from that work out the exact internal volume of the mechs. That is assuming the internal density averages out about the same. After you do that then you can make a better case for it needing scaled down and exactly by how much. But this just looking at height it pointless.

Also PGI DO NOT DELAY the Grasshopper I am looking forward to playing with it Tuesday.

Edited by XX Sulla XX, 15 March 2015 - 01:23 PM.

[Creovex]

Bishop Steiner, on 15 March 2015 - 12:58 PM, said:

Oh, I agree, and when it doesn't stand up to the Meta, it will get tossed to the pile and declared crap still, along with the rest that are not "Comp Approved".

Quick check.... How many fully sponsored professional gamers are there competing in MWO..... oh yeah, zero. So comp can continue to dream it is something more then just a fan favorite league...

Edited by Creovex, 15 March 2015 - 01:31 PM.

[Burktross]

XX Sulla XX, on 15 March 2015 - 01:19 PM, said:

Comparing things only from height is never going to give you a true idea of if they are scaled correctly. What would work best would be if you go into the game files and get the 3d model. Then from that work out the exact internal volume of the mechs. That is assuming the internal density averages out about the same. After you do that then you can make a better case for it needing scaled down and exactly by how much. But this just looking at height it pointless.

Not necessarily. Psychologically speaking, you're going to be much more inclined to focus fire the bigger, target, even if it is say, flatter. Be it as a subconscious method of threat evaluation, or noticing an easier target, the Grasshopper will be big to boot and focused for its height above others as well.

[Felicitatem Parco]

Burktross, on 15 March 2015 - 01:22 PM, said:

Not necessarily. Psychologically speaking, you're going to be much more inclined to focus fire the bigger, target, even if it is say, flatter. Be it as a subconscious method of threat evaluation, or noticing an easier target, the Grasshopper will be big to boot and focused for its height above others as well.

Surface area and volume to not scale hand-in-hand. Compare a pancake to a sphere, for instance.

Fat Mechs with Volume X are harder to hit than flat Mechs with Volume X. Same volume, same weight, different target size.

[XX Sulla XX]

Quote

Not necessarily. Psychologically speaking, you're going to be much more inclined to focus fire the bigger, target, even if it is say, flatter. Be it as a subconscious method of threat evaluation, or noticing an easier target, the Grasshopper will be big to boot and focused for its height above others as well.

You are now talking about design instead of scaling. Your statement above does not change if it is scaled correctly in relation to volume but if it is designed to suit your taste.

[PurpleNinja]

Fix?
Based on what?

[Insects]

Pointless, PGI don't make mistakes...however it comes out will be declared as working as intended.
Hopefully it is good, it had potential up until these size issues were raised, hopefully just speculative overreaction.
If there is a size problem then best it will get is more quirks.

[Burktross]

XX Sulla XX, on 15 March 2015 - 01:37 PM, said:

You are now talking about design instead of scaling. Your statement above does not change if it is scaled correctly in relation to volume but if it is designed to suit your taste.

What? If it's bigger than other mechs, it'll be targeted faster. I have no idea what you're talking about.