49 replies to this topic

[Void Angel]

JC Daxion, on 17 April 2015 - 11:48 AM, said:

Said a lot of interesting things, but i think some of it is sorta off the point a little as i don't think people are saying just throw out everything meta, and play bad mechs. (aka a jag DD with 6 machine guns and a pair of ML's) But there are ways to build the DD outside of the typical AC-5 build, and a lot of mechs fall into this category.

Trouble is, that's exactly what a lot of people do say. Not "let's play bad 'mech builds," but "I play the game my way, to have fun." It sounds good until you realize that they are saying this in response to being told that their builds aren't optimal. So they essentially stamp their foot, stick out their tongue, and sa "NUH-uh!" Are the people telling them to "go meta" inflexible and dogmatic? Not always; and whether or not that's the case, it's still foolish to reject experienced players' viewpoints out of hand because you don't feel they're nice enough about giving them, or because it's not what you want to hear.

Again, I can't get behind telling new players to never use non-meta weapons, like LRMs earlier in this thread. It's good to get to know all the weapons in the game (except the flamer; no one needs a flamer,) but players need to accept that the reason so many of us use meta-game builds is because those builds work better mechanically in the game. Not being good with Weapon X has a solution: practice. You don't have to give up the builds you find more effective, but you do have to recognize that proficiency in those weapon systems is important to playing your best. I'm sympathetic to those who feel they're being told that they have to use certain builds, or else they're bad ("Mana Tide saves raids!" "No it doesn't! You don't even notice when I pop it, and you're not using it right, anyway! It's a level 40 mana potion! Do the MATH!") However, I've also had to try to get a team together when people insist on playing their Special Snowflake builds instead of just bringing a fracking AC/20.

[Voivode]

Void Angel, on 17 April 2015 - 12:34 PM, said:

Trouble is, that's exactly what a lot of people do say. Not "let's play bad 'mech builds," but "I play the game my way, to have fun." It sounds good until you realize that they are saying this in response to being told that their builds aren't optimal. So they essentially stamp their foot, stick out their tongue, and sa "NUH-uh!" Are the people telling them to "go meta" inflexible and dogmatic? Not always; and whether or not that's the case, it's still foolish to reject experienced players' viewpoints out of hand because you don't feel they're nice enough about giving them, or because it's not what you want to hear.

Again, I can't get behind telling new players to never use non-meta weapons, like LRMs earlier in this thread. It's good to get to know all the weapons in the game (except the flamer; no one needs a flamer,) but players need to accept that the reason so many of us use meta-game builds is because those builds work better mechanically in the game. Not being good with Weapon X has a solution: practice. You don't have to give up the builds you find more effective, but you do have to recognize that proficiency in those weapon systems is important to playing your best. I'm sympathetic to those who feel they're being told that they have to use certain builds, or else they're bad ("Mana Tide saves raids!" "No it doesn't! You don't even notice when I pop it, and you're not using it right, anyway! It's a level 40 mana potion! Do the MATH!") However, I've also had to try to get a team together when people insist on playing their Special Snowflake builds instead of just bringing a fracking AC/20.

You don't have to be "meta" to contribute well to a team. I think that's the point a lot of "do it your own way" players make. There are so many basic things that can be done to help the team that aren't chassis unique.

If a player sticks with the team, doesn't stand behind friendlies and checks their fire for friendlies, shoots the same targets as other friendlies, and carries a useful consumable or two, I'm not going to get mad if they're blasting away at the enemy with two small lasers and two flamers. Hell, as long as they aim those flamers at the enemy's cockpit even those terrible things will be contributing to the team!

[Void Angel]

If you come to a fight with two small lasers and a brace of flamers, you're creating a significant disadvantage for your team. You don't have to "get mad" at him - but you would be remiss if you didn't tell him that his build needs work. Let me show you my favorite PuG Thunderbolt. You will note the lack of ER Lasers, PPCs, and Autocannons, yet this 'mech can hold its own quite well, even against meta machines; it's designed as a disruptive brawler that soaks up a disproportionate amount of damage while responding with heavy damage of its own. It's not strongly "meta," by some people's definitions - but it works best with meta teammates. Everything does. I don't mind if my teammate wants to experiment in matches, though I may be annoyed if he underperforms us to a loss - but remember, we're talking about forums here; we're talking about philosophies.

[Tim East]

Void Angel, on 17 April 2015 - 01:11 PM, said:

If you come to a fight with two small lasers and a brace of flamers, you're creating a significant disadvantage for your team. You don't have to "get mad" at him - but you would be remiss if you didn't tell him that his build needs work. Let me show you my favorite PuG Thunderbolt. You will note the lack of ER Lasers, PPCs, and Autocannons, yet this 'mech can hold its own quite well, even against meta machines; it's designed as a disruptive brawler that soaks up a disproportionate amount of damage while responding with heavy damage of its own. It's not strongly "meta," by some people's definitions - but it works best with meta teammates. Everything does. I don't mind if my teammate wants to experiment in matches, though I may be annoyed if he underperforms us to a loss - but remember, we're talking about forums here; we're talking about philosophies.

Excellent argument, friend. I have actually had some ridiculous success with deliberately terrible builds, but that sort of revolves around my teammates being able to capitalize on what I am doing. Flamer Locusts are fantastic at pulling aggro for some reason, but that will either bring complete victory or just waste a mech depending on if your team charges while you have the enemy literally spinning in circles for them.

For the most part, the meta exists because it is good. People who have used it have found great success, and word has spread. Then there is the counter-meta, designed to destroy meta mechs, typicall at the cost of being less efficient at killing non-meta mechs. The current meta doesn't have a super-obvious counter that I am aware of though, so go ahead and disregard that if you're looking for useful information instead of trivia here.

The evolution of the meta arises directly from people reading the patch notes and theorycrafting from them, and from people trying ludicrous builds that may or may not function very well, also known as experimentation. Some experimental builds may suit any given person's playstyle better than a meta build might. This is where you see the "don't play just meta builds" speeches arise from.

Using old weapons in new ways was one of the things I used to enjoy about Magic the Gathering's metagame, back before I lost any and all respect for DCI. Those kooky, off-the-wall ridiculous decks/mechs are what keep life interesting. They may not be perfect, or efficient, or 4th turn killers, but if they can forestall the insta-gibber PPFLD alpha-meister builds, they can win, and they can be fun.

[Void Angel]

ANY Locust is an aggro magnet - the flamers just make you more noticeable. That's why the Pirates' Bane is so awesome; you can actually play your 'mech because people don't see "Locust" on their target info screen and chase you all over creation looking for the easy kill. You can help your team a lot by pulling half the enemies away from the battle, but it's not that much fun for the Locust pilot involved.

[Tim East]

Void Angel, on 17 April 2015 - 01:46 PM, said:

You can help your team a lot by pulling half the enemies away from the battle, but it's not that much fun for the Locust pilot involved.

I respectfully disagree. I find it intensely amusing when a bunch of mechs of differing weight classes get strung out behind me trying to chase the cookie.

[Krivvan]

I don't tell people that they have to play good mechs. But I want people to recognize that they're taking badly built mechs.

If they're just doing random fun lulz builds then okay whatever.

But when they start complaining that they aren't doing better while simultaneously rejecting any advice, then I have a big issue.

[JC Daxion]

Void Angel, on 17 April 2015 - 01:11 PM, said:

If you come to a fight with two small lasers and a brace of flamers, you're creating a significant disadvantage for your team. You don't have to "get mad" at him - but you would be remiss if you didn't tell him that his build needs work. Let me show you my favorite PuG Thunderbolt. You will note the lack of ER Lasers, PPCs, and Autocannons, yet this 'mech can hold its own quite well, even against meta machines; it's designed as a disruptive brawler that soaks up a disproportionate amount of damage while responding with heavy damage of its own. It's not strongly "meta," by some people's definitions - but it works best with meta teammates. Everything does. I don't mind if my teammate wants to experiment in matches, though I may be annoyed if he underperforms us to a loss - but remember, we're talking about forums here; we're talking about philosophies.

heh, i have something similar i have used but it was with a single PPC in the arm. But that was my point really, you don't have to play a meta mech to make a fun/decent build. That really was my only point, non-meta is not always bad. Maybe the top teir 12man's are different, but in pug land, a lot can work and be fun.

[Void Angel]

Sure! But we should still be telling players what the meta is, and to expect to need it more and more as they advance in skill and Elo.

[Repasy Cooper]

This is great advice OP. Meta is pretty overrated, and unless it complements your play style you won't ever need a meta build. The meta is always changing, so it's not a good idea to become obsessed over it. By time you hear about and start to implement a meta, a new one is already in the makings.

It's like fashion. Everybody likes to focus on what's popular at the moment, but it's the select few people with foresight that define what's popular. What I mean by that analogy is this: If you want to truly succeed in this game, don't follow the crowd. Lead the pack. Be creative and innovative with your builds. Don't focus on the current trends, focus on your own strengths and use THAT as the foundation for your play style. Try the current meta, sure, and only use it if it works for you.