59 replies to this topic

[Lord0fHats]

KiraOnime, on 02 May 2015 - 12:53 PM, said:

Break one meta and people will find a new one.

This. You will never escape meta. So long as people want to win, they will look for the best way to win.

[Jotan Horn]

I do like the idea of randomization in your drop decks, but I feel that the ability to min/max weapons no matter their size is part of the reason we have such issues with CW.

For example: a Locust normally had a single SRM 6 and ML with a pair of MGs... but PGI has put quircks out there for ER LL... why?

Because they are playing to the meta of the competitive players who say "this is the only way we can use this mech and win"....

Until you fix that mindset, you won't be able to make the variety happen...

[Repasy Cooper]

Keh, meta is overrated. I used stock mechs for nearly the entire event! My most frequent lineup was a Mist Lynx B/C, Mad Dog B, Timber Wolf A, and Gargoyle D/A. Not a single one of them had modified loadouts.

[ztac]

There are a lot of problems in that first PGI would have to actually balance the game , then all mechs would be viable. They need to make each weight actually be better than the previous one. Lights are a huge problem in that along with small hitboxes and decent armour the also have speed (well IS ones at least!). PGI need to go back to the drawing board really and rebuild what each class does and how it is put together and what is actually allowable!

Also they need to offer a solo queue for CW as mech balance in itself is not enough, but also the whole ELO system needs a sensible overhaul as player skill and whether you are in a group or PUG are also major factors! But essentially they really need to bring balance to the game and do away with the quirk system! This is though beyond their ability I think as they have been trying to nail down 'balance' since the very beginning!

[Boris The Spider]

Repair timers mitigated by faction control of production facilities, so faction mechs get production bonus, salvaged mechs again grant bonus and perhaps allow for infrequent use of clan-tech for IS. All affected by supply and demand, so the more popular/meta mechs recycle slower. Mechs always available in non CW matches.

Result Meta destroyed, CW less about suicide dashes/mecha wave strategy, reason to hold certain planets, use for unit coffers and immersion.

[Molossian Dog]

Aurawind, on 02 May 2015 - 06:42 PM, said:

I feel like winning shouldn't be about what Mechs you pilot, ...

And yet it is. The performance differences are -that- glaring.

I´d love it to be otherwise, but evidently PGI isn´t capable of balance. For years.
I thought they were on a good way...then the clamz came. And power creep did its magic since then.

[Steve Pryde]

Solution for clan mechs: unlock engine and make endo/ferro possible to equip. That's all.

For IS mechs? Tone down some quirks and remove xl engine death rule from IS mechs.

[Branckes]

Boris The Spider, on 03 May 2015 - 03:39 AM, said:

Repair timers mitigated by faction control of production facilities, so faction mechs get production bonus, salvaged mechs again grant bonus and perhaps allow for infrequent use of clan-tech for IS. All affected by supply and demand, so the more popular/meta mechs recycle slower. Mechs always available in non CW matches.

Result Meta destroyed, CW less about suicide dashes/mecha wave strategy, reason to hold certain planets, use for unit coffers and immersion.

What Boris says got the point. That's only the way to break the meta and will bring some "depth" to CW.

Edited by Branckes, 03 May 2015 - 05:58 AM.

[Quaamik]

hybrid black: "no matter what people will bring the best of what they can, there will always be meta."

That is an absolute. In any competition, people bring the best hey can. In a competition where you can build / tweak what you want, the best platform with the best tweaks becomes the most common.

The issues that make certain mechs most common are in part related to that "meta". That cannot be fixed. Its human nature. "Fix" it, and the game becomes less interesting and ultimately dies. Can you imagine dropping in CW and getting stuck with a random drop deck where you had none of the mechs that you could swap out with, and winding up against several who had current "meta" mechs with current "meta" builds?

There are two other issues that influence it though. Weapon / mech balance and map / mission similarity.

For the balance, PGI seems to be working on it with quirks. Its not perfect (far from it) but as thy change, the metas will as well and (hopefully) they will reach a point where there are a wide variety of builds that can be meta.

As for the maps / missions. There is only one mission with two sides. The maps don't vary by a whole lot. Certainly not by enough to make Large Lasers / Gauss / PPCs dominant in one and AC' / Machine guns / Small Lasers dominant in another.

That could be changed with varied maps / missions. Incorporate a couple of the large maps (Alpine, Cauldron, Tourmaline) into CW. Then vary for each of them, and the existing CW maps, between the current CW mission and a variation on the Assault, maybe even with a variation on Conquest. Perhaps, in with the quirks and patchs, patch / alter areas on some of the maps - possibly duplicating them prior so as to make two maps that are similar except a few KEY features. You'll have a wider variety of (admittedly Meta) mechs when there is a wider variety of terrain and missions.

[Sanosuke1221]

Boris The Spider, on 03 May 2015 - 03:39 AM, said:

Repair timers mitigated by faction control of production facilities, so faction mechs get production bonus, salvaged mechs again grant bonus and perhaps allow for infrequent use of clan-tech for IS. All affected by supply and demand, so the more popular/meta mechs recycle slower. Mechs always available in non CW matches.

Result Meta destroyed, CW less about suicide dashes/mecha wave strategy, reason to hold certain planets, use for unit coffers and immersion.

^^ I think this is a very good idea, it would take some time to implement but I think this is the right direction. This would make large scale strategy a part of CW and players will have more immersion in the Mechwarrior universe because their actions will have a direct effect on their faction's success or failure.

Edited by Sanosuke1221, 03 May 2015 - 07:48 AM.

[Kira Onime]

Branckes, on 03 May 2015 - 05:56 AM, said:

What Boris says got the point. That's only the way to break the meta and will bring some "depth" to CW.

You might break the current meta but said meta will change and evolve.
Breaking this one will only create a new one and then people are going to complain about that one until a new one is created and so on.

There will always be an optimal strategy and build.

[Boris The Spider]

KiraOnime, on 03 May 2015 - 12:36 PM, said:

You might break the current meta but said meta will change and evolve.
Breaking this one will only create a new one and then people are going to complain about that one until a new one is created and so on.

There will always be an optimal strategy and build.

Which would always take the longest to resupply, thats the beauty of using a supply and demand mechanic. The game evolves around the meta rather than the meta evolving around the game.

A particular faction may have its own meta, due to its mechs resupplying faster, but if this caused an imbalance its not a game breaker, the chassis could be reigned in by decreasing its base respawn speed.

Edited by Boris The Spider, 03 May 2015 - 03:08 PM.

[Molossian Dog]

You know, generally speaking I am not averse to the basic line of thinking of Boris and Aurawind.

"Fight with what you have. No commander ever had the forces he wished for."

There is a plethora of ways you could go for this, design-wise. A Battle Value system, a repair cycle system (like Boris suggested), a system of "each individual Mech can be used only once per planet/CW attack phase", even something akin to a strategic meta-game where high ranking faction members allocate Mech numbers and types to specific operations and probably a dozen more of ways.

I am convinced any of these ways could be made into something fun and immersive. But all of them have a crapload of pre-requisites. Pre-requisites, that are mostly very basic and which we do not have. At all.

- A raison d´être for each Mech.

Spoiler

The only capability a Mech is measured by is how good he kills other Mechs. Or, the rather crude other measure stick is how good he rushes gens. We have no role warfare, we do not even have a real "quirk" system that separates "scout" Mechs from "backstabber" light Mechs, a raider Mech from a line Mech, a fire support from a command Mech etc. We do not even have a skill system or a dedicated module system that precludes any non-scout from taking UAVs for example.

- A raison d´être for planets

Spoiler

This means two things. First each planet is the same. So far we do not even have a higher chance for the Hellebore map than for Boreal on a desert planet. Not to speak of sophisticated things like special sites, cities, factories or anything else that gives a planet individuality. You never stop and think "Ah, so THIS is the fabeled Hesperus mech factory!" or "Hell, they weren´t kidding. Tharkad is REALLY cold!".

Second the gain or loss of a planet has no consequences either for the faction and also for those players that take or loose it. There is no economy involved, no special achievement, it goes too fast and makes no difference to win/loose, let´s say Hesperus II or Star´s End.
So far we do not even have randomized factors, like a chance for getting different spawn points, buildings appearing or not or anything else in that regard.

- Maps and more important map design philosophy

Spoiler

While having different art the maps are basically all the same and are built the same way. The "features" like gates etc are almost equidistant on each map. The chokepoint or no chokepoint philosophy is as deep as they get from a tactical point of view. They aren´t even using elevation aside from placing "objects" that you can stand on over the maps. The only keywords thrown around in regards to maps by PGI is "open" which equates to "good snipe, bro" and "dense terrain" which is "good brawl, hurr, durr."
That is more than insufficient. It is lazy. It reveals a complete lack of vision and a glaring disinterest in what makes playing MWO fun.

- Missions, not game-modes

Spoiler

As long as there are no major diversifications of what you are supposed to do with your Mech during the game Mech variety will always fall short. As long as there are no arial targets there is no reason to bring an AA-Mech like the Jager. (Well , it is supposed to be an AA Mech. It doesn´t have anything that makes it one, see above) When there is nothing to scout and no game mode rewarding scouting why bring a Spider instead of a Firestarter? When there is no precious booty to steal why bother about hand actuators? When there is no heavily fortificated pass why think about getting a JJ Mech in order to bypass it? When there is no last stand to buy time, why bother bringing a expendable Mech?

The gist of this is, all you do in MWO is shooting stuff dead. So if a system (like the OP´s or Boris´) is restricting you to Mechs that shoot stuff worse the players will be frustrated because they feel gimped, DOA or designated to loose.

There will always be a meta, yes, so there must be a reason to bring a non meta mech.
Maps and missions should give you possibilities to make good use of such non meta mechs,

- A raison d´être for units and factions

Spoiler

Neither player nor dev controlled decision making above the unit level. There is not even a tool or a concept of that. There is nobody to assign you a target/mission or anything else that would prompt people to interact with each other. Hell, even straightforward communicating within a faction/unit is mostly done via 3rd party tools, like teamspeak, because PGI can´t be bothered to establish a TS server on their own.

On the unit level the only in-game difference are 3-4 letters in front of your name. That even that little, negligible factor gets peoples´ attention is evident if you observe to what lenghts people go to "tag" a planet. The basic tools to control your unit are also underdeveloped, crude and insuficient. You cannot even assign people to lances before dropping ffs!
You cannot do anything with your unit coffers like the bandied around idea of acquiring dropships or base facilities or anything else.
You do not even know where your unit is! You just teleport around the Inner Sphere at will. And since the planets, maps etc make it irrelevant where you are it doesn´t even matter. This is hilariously stupid.

What I am trying to say is, we are dreaming. MWO in general and CW in particular are not even beyond the alpha stage. Suggestions like you made would fall flat in an enviroment where the basic game is laughably broken and the developers struggling with even basic gameplay features. Restricting Mechs when there is so little to do and so little to think about would rather backfire and piss people off instead of making them want to play more.
And pay.

-----------------------------------------------------------------

MWO is awesome ... for a college project.

Maybe in 2020 we might have a MechWarrior game. Until then we are condemned to this Mecha-Pokemon.
And I am not sure the business model will keep this running for long enough.

Edited by Molossian Dog, 03 May 2015 - 04:54 PM.

[Peiper]

Sized harpoints. If the mech is armed with small weapons when you buy it, you can't put larger weapons in, or vice versa. You'll have far less big-weapon boats, and far more variety in both weaponry and mechs.

[Muffinator]

Mystere, on 02 May 2015 - 12:57 PM, said:

The only way to break the "meta" is to be better, run a different config, and whoop the ass of all those who run the "meta".

Maybe I'm a noob but I really think the 'meta' mechs are overstated - success in CW is much more about working as a team, playing well and having a viable strategy than which particular mechs you choose. Of course the mechs should be competitive ones, and not every single mech is competitive, but the viable options are waaaay wider than stalker, thunderbolt, raven. For example I cracked 2500 damage the other day with 2 x hunchback, jager & misery.

The proliferation of 'meta' mechs is because unimaginative players copy what they see working, without realising the top players using those mechs could probably do as well in lots of other mechs.

[Widowmaker1981]

Aurawind, on 02 May 2015 - 01:34 PM, said:

I can see what you're saying by limiting to one variant of one chassis but the problem will still be that people who use meta will still just use 4 different Meta Mechs. So you will see the same 4 Mechs in every Meta Drop Decks.

I don't think that my solution is really that complicated to implement, its possible, but I don't think it something that can be implemented instantaneously.

As to grendeldog's comments:

I don't think that 75+% of people would quit CW with randomized drop decks. Hell if that's a problem they could have 5 random drop decks to choose from, I mean at least there's more choice then. I never suggested to remove player choice either, but something has to be put in place to prevent exploiting the best Mechs and weapons. I can see it attract more players to CW because it would provide a more varied and even playing field. It would provide a better feel to Battletech/Mechwarrior battles. Besides it shouldn't really matter what you pilot if its a decent loadout and you pilot it well and you coordinate well with your team, that's what CW is about.

I do agree though that alot of the balancing issues are weapons and quirks, which is another problem that should also be addressed. Personally I have a problem with the heat and beam duration on Clan weapons for one example.

If i cant have the fun of designing different CW decks and loadouts for the different maps, id simply never play CW. So thats at least 1.

And no, i dont always use the same deck or mechs. I dont even use a stalker in 90% of my decks (only time i do its BNC, STK, FS9, PNT, not exactly full 'meta')

The answer to improving mech diversity on IS side is twofold:
1) Buff unused mechs. They are unused because they suck.
2) Somehow force people to think for themselves. Stalkers are far from the only viable assault right now, but too many people dont try other options.

The answer to improving mech diversity on Clan side is simples
= Wait for wave 3 to be fully released.

[ThirtyOughtSix]

My suggestion - quirk the meta mechs. WHAT?!

Sure it's easy - PGI sees meta mechs that consistently drop in CW, PGI places a +5-25% tonnage quirk for dropping in one O.o. Thus if a thunder is meta you drop at 85 tons rather than 65. Limiting your use of a stalker. This will surly make the decks more diverse. Call it a drop ship loading specialization penalty - meta mechs are harder to load and secure

Edit: I realize this is a band-aid. But at least it solves the immediate issue.

Edited by Hyper99, 07 May 2015 - 08:11 AM.

[Mystere]

Muffinator, on 06 May 2015 - 05:30 PM, said:

Maybe I'm a noob but I really think the 'meta' mechs are overstated - success in CW is much more about working as a team, playing well and having a viable strategy than which particular mechs you choose. Of course the mechs should be competitive ones, and not every single mech is competitive, but the viable options are waaaay wider than stalker, thunderbolt, raven. For example I cracked 2500 damage the other day with 2 x hunchback, jager & misery.

The proliferation of 'meta' mechs is because unimaginative players copy what they see working, without realising the top players using those mechs could probably do as well in lots of other mechs.

The "competitive" gaming world is made up mostly of "monkey see, money do" types, just like much of humanity I guess.

[lol lol lol lol lol lol lol lol]

Aurawind, on 02 May 2015 - 10:48 AM, said:

I just thought of something after reading the stats for Tukkayid regarding the "Meta". According to the stats IS used mainly Thunderbolts, Stalkers and Ravens, and Clan used mainly Stormcrows, Timber Wolves and Hellbringers.

Lock engines across the board. Only allow for XL or standard upgrades.

Make quirks that work around stock mech configurations instead of catering to a metabuild (For instance, having a FIREstarter with Small Pulse Laser quirks doesn't make much sense when doesn't come equipped with them, does it?)

Players lose quirks the more they change weapons around to suit a metabuild (somehow, but basic idea is to make stock mechs a more attractive choice rather than bastardizing mechs out of their lore roles.)

Also, a left field thought... maybe make some sort of function like this specifically for CW? Allow TDM stuff to do whatever you want, but force rules for CW with builds and such.

[Adamski]

Wow, so many god awful ideas. Want to see more mech diversity? Then increase the viability of under used mechs!

As much as I love my Vindicator and Commando, I'm not going to bring them when they are absolutely outclassed by other mechs of similar tonnage.

I've mastered 32 mechs so far, and would love to bring more variety, but PGI is preoccupied with releasing more mech packs instead of fixing old mechs geometry, scaling, and quirks.