38 replies to this topic

[Creovex]

@OP

From the sounds of the new map reworks, the maps are getting blown out and bigger... this can successfully discourage such single range weapon builds in the future (pure braweler?? good luck making it within range to dominate)

[Theodore42]

Cathy, on 13 June 2015 - 02:45 AM, said:

I just think its funny, that people expect PGI to build a game around their builds, because they seem incapable, of adapting to the map they're on.

If you could select your loadout based on the map, there would be a lot MORE adapting going on, not less.

Probably too much adapting, tbh. The skill cap would get higher and the game would get harder, which I am always for.

But counting on newbies to know the best loadout for which map is probably a little to much to expect them to handle, which is why I don't expect a change. Not because it would make the game easier.

[Mystere]

bad arcade kitty, on 13 June 2015 - 03:29 AM, said:

fast mechs with brawling builds don't really have problems on alpine, assaults seem to suffer though

It's only a problem when they insist on fighting on Derp Mountain.

[Hit the Deck]

Arctic Cheetah will be able to sneak up from behind undetected (if the enemies don't have seismic) and ninja kill those on top of Candy Mountain one by one while they are busy shooting downrange.

[Novakaine]

Hit the Deck, on 13 June 2015 - 08:03 AM, said:

Arctic Cheetah will be able to sneak up from behind undetected (if the enemies don't have seismic) and ninja kill those on top of Candy Mountain one by one while they are busy shooting downrange.

You can do this in practically any mech especially lurm boats.
Seriously no one even bother to turn around and look at me as I lurmed them to death.
Except for the last two that noticed and came down to get me.
They failed.
Love me some Hunchie J

[MechWarrior3671771]

I've wondered about this too.

On one hand its not realistic that Higher Command is so stupid as to send me to Alpine World with medium pulse. Then I remembered my time in the Marines and realized its very realistic that Higher would fubar this.

I like the idea of having 2 mechs to choose from at drop, but I worry that would put too much powergaming into play and penalize players who built all-around mechs. Most military platforms are designed to be diverse. When they specialize too much, they get rolled by superior tactics.

[FupDup]

This is why I nearly always use generalist loadouts that can fight anywhere. Things like the 4 ERML + 2 UAC/5 Hellbringer or 4 LPL Warhawk. Builds like those are always able to contribute, never not effective.

[Ultimax]

MrMadguy, on 13 June 2015 - 03:04 AM, said:

Players, using Meta builds, don't need to adapt and I need?

It's the other way around.


Builds that are "meta builds" have evolved specifically because players don't know what map (and in some cases mode) they will get.


Players have adapted to playing builds that perform well in most situations.


They might not be the best build in every situation, a laser vomit mech will get wrecked by a proper brawler at brawl range and out sniped by a sniper build at long range - but they do well on most maps, in most situations even if they aren't always ideal.



So if you decide to play a specialist, that's kind of on you to make it work.


If you are playing random game mode, random solo pug team composition, random map - then you should choose your build accordingly.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 13 June 2015 - 08:59 AM.

[Theodore42]

FupDup, on 13 June 2015 - 08:36 AM, said:

This is why I nearly always use generalist loadouts that can fight anywhere. Things like the 4 ERML + 2 UAC/5 Hellbringer or 4 LPL Warhawk. Builds like those are always able to contribute, never not effective.

So, basically what everyone else uses?

Ultimatum X, on 13 June 2015 - 08:42 AM, said:

It's the other way around.


Builds that are "meta builds" have evolved specifically because players don't know what map (and in some cases mode) they will get.


Players have adapted to playing builds that perform well in most situations.


They might not be the best build in every situation, a laser vomit mech will get wrecked by a proper brawler at brawl range and out sniped by a sniper build at long range - but they do well on most maps, in most situations even if they aren't always ideal.



So if you decide to play a specialist, that's kind of on you to make it work.


If you are playing random game mode, random solo pug team composition, random map - then you should choose your build accordingly.

Why would you be against allowing more specialization? If you want a meta game, this is where it is.

Yes, I have my jack of all trades builds. Yes, I facewreck with 3MPL and 6SL on Alpine. I'm fine with adapting.

I'm trying to say that this is the next level. Totally different tactics would emerge if smart players that are good at adapting to their environment could pick builds based on the maps they're dropping in.

And it isn't consistent with lore? I get it, but that is so arbitrary! I don't really know anything about BT or Lore but I've played MWO more than any other game in the last year because it is a badass game. So this is how to make it more badass.

The only reason I'm against letting players pick between a couple builds per drop is because that would create an even greater skill discrepancy between newbies and experienced players.

We should press PGI to figure out a way to allow MORE ADAPTABILITY for players per map without ruining the game for newbies. Maybe in CW? Maybe in group queue? I dunno, but there is insane potential in this game for some UBER-hardcoreness that isn't going to be fully realized as long as you don't know what map you're dropping in.

[Felio]

It may be frustrating when making builds, but having mixed maps encourages mixed builds. I think that's a good thing.

[DAYLEET]

MrMadguy, on 13 June 2015 - 12:05 AM, said:

The biggest problem of this game isn't weapon balance - it's maps' design. I won't write long post. I'll just give you an example.

1) If I'll equip Gauss and ERPPC - I will perform well on any map.
2) If I'll replace Gauss with AC/20 (so called mixed build) and will get Alpine Peaks - I'll lose half of my performance.
3) If I'll also replace ERPPC with medium lasers and will get Alpine Peaks - I'll become useless metal can.

So sniper performs well on any map, while brawler build sucks at half of maps. I don't know, which map I'll get next. What would be my choice? It would be obvious.

I'm not "Meta" player - I prefer diversity in my builds and therefore half of my builds are either brawlers or mixed ones. That causes me to suck and underperform on half of maps. So, there are two possible ways to solve this problem:
1) Remove so called "Meta" maps and balance all maps around all possible builds - every map should have enough cover for brawler 'Mechs to get close enough to snipers.
2) Let us choose our 'Mechs after seeing, what map we'll get, so "Meta" players, who have made "right decision" a priori won't have unfair advantage due to this fact.

80% of the fighting on Alpine is short range if not outright brawling. Stop trying to be the most efficient about everything and just have fun with the rest of us.

And it's cool that's theres map that are cold and other hot. It means you have to adapt to the environment.

I also prefer diversity, which is why yesterday i was playing a summoner with a lrm 2lasers and 2 srm. Don't ask me how good i was(not great lol), ask me if it was fun(it was).

Alistair Winter, on 13 June 2015 - 02:59 AM, said:

I just wish we could select camo based on the map

I never got that one, people who says camo help them identify you or not. The friend i play with always says that and often comment on some of my ridiculously bright/mismatch colors. Me ill never notice what color you are wearing, if it's moving and not blue i shoot it. i guess im like that T Rex in Jurassic Park, my vision is based on movement lol

Edited by DAYLEET, 13 June 2015 - 09:48 AM.

[Ultimax]

Theodore42, on 13 June 2015 - 09:25 AM, said:

Why would you be against allowing more specialization? If you want a meta game, this is where it is.

I'm not? Where did I say that?

My point at the OP is that he feels the "all around meta builds don't need to adapt" - which isn't true.

They already adapted, they did it in the mechlab when they put their build together.

Theodore42, on 13 June 2015 - 09:25 AM, said:

I'm trying to say that this is the next level. Totally different tactics would emerge if smart players that are good at adapting to their environment could pick builds based on the maps they're dropping in.

This already exists, and it already happens.

It's called "competitive play".

Everything from MRBC, RHoD (4x4), MWOLN, etc.

If you want to see what happens when full teams can synergize builds & build drop decks according to the map/mode - this is where it's at.


Perhaps you should try it.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 13 June 2015 - 09:36 AM.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Nope.

Reason: As a soldier under house/mercernary/clan command, you go where you are ordered to go. You are not a special snowflake and you don't always get to choose where you fight. Feel lucky that you are able to choose what loadout you bring on your mech at all. or that you can have literally HUNDERDS of mechs available to you.

This, is why generalist mechs shine, because a generalist mech, doesn't have to worry about this. THE MAP SYSTEM IS MENT TO ENCOURAGE YOU TO BRING A MIX OF WEAPONRY, NOT TO JUST RELY ON A SPECIFIC WEAPONS SYSTEM.

If you're a short range brawler, sure, that's a valid play style, and yes, if you end up on Alpine, you'll find yourself in a rather bad position... Maybe you should have kept that LRM10 on that atlas huh? Just incase you ended up in a position like that?

Mechs are "generally" ment to be generalists in some description, most mechs you see, are intended to function at all ranges. Look at the CN9-A's default loadout. AC10, 2mlas, 1lrm10. This is a build that can function out to 1000m, all the way down to 0.

There are of course outlayers, the HBK-4G is a great example but also one that is grounded in it's role, 2mlas, 1slas, 1AC20. This mech is ment to have a hard hitting close range punch. But there are also variations that drop the hard hitting AC20 to give it extra range, or to slam missiles onto the chassis so that it may function as a fire support platform.

So please, STOP attempting to change the game because you feel cheated in your playstyle, and understand that, very likely, the way you're playing the game is far from what is actually intended. Mechwarrior Online, for better or worse, is a game that takes place in the Battletech universe. There are just some things that work a specific way, EVEN IF THAT WAY SEEMS STUPID TO YOU.

Theodore42, on 13 June 2015 - 07:44 AM, said:

If you could select your loadout based on the map, there would be a lot MORE adapting going on, not less.

No, there would be less adapting. Because people would build specific mechs for specific reasons.
"Oh, I'm on Terra Therma, I'll bring a low heat ballistics boat"
"Oh I'm on Frozen City, Energy Boats all day."
"Oh I'm on Alpine. Gauss/PPC all day err day"

Knowing what map is coming up, stagnates play.

Not knowing what map is coming up, allows a player to attempt to balance their builds for any environment.

"Well, my mech comes base with 4mlas, ac20, srm6 and a LRM10... I could drop the 20 to a 10 for some extra range and weight savings, and maybe upgrade to of the mlas to Llas..."

But most people don't think like above... instead they go "Oh wow, I can get a 60X point alpha by piling 10 medium lasers onto my mech! AWESOME!" Then they cry when they get a map like alpine, and they're too slow to get into the fight. That's not adapting, that's min-maxing.

Edited by Flash Frame, 13 June 2015 - 10:24 AM.

[CocoaJin]

MrMadguy, on 13 June 2015 - 03:04 AM, said:

Players, using Meta builds, don't need to adapt and I need? Why? Am I special? You know, MM doesn't balance teams, based on our builds. And until it won't do it, team, that has more 'Mechs in right builds - will get unfair advantage, as long as players, who use Meta builds. Role-based maps are designed with some ideal utopian picture of the game in mind - game, where only premade teams with ideal coordination and role distribution exist. They - can adopt, PUGs - can't. PUG matches are about RNG - no place for assumptions, that everything will work as intended by itself, there. Game won't balance itself - devs have to do it.

Learn to work through adversity, it's a sign of maturity and a pre-requisite for personal success. The truth of the matter, no one cares to breast-feed you wins or satisfactory performance.

Edited by CocoaJin, 15 June 2015 - 12:25 PM.

[Theodore42]

Flash Frame, on 13 June 2015 - 09:46 AM, said:

Nope.

Reason: As a soldier under house/mercernary/clan command, you go where you are ordered to go. You are not a special snowflake and you don't always get to choose where you fight. Feel lucky that you are able to choose what loadout you bring on your mech at all. or that you can have literally HUNDERDS of mechs available to you.

I get this argument. On the other hand, MWO is a game. PGI is making a co-op mode. I'm not into that, not sure if I'll like it, I'll play it, but will I like it more than the PVP modes? No way.
I would also love a stock mech only queue or mode.
But when you have a game that has the potential to be greater, why not do that?
I mean, come on! In solo queue I drop in my HBK next to SCRs

Flash Frame, on 13 June 2015 - 09:46 AM, said:

So please, STOP attempting to change the game because you feel cheated in your playstyle, and understand that, very likely, the way you're playing the game is far from what is actually intended. Mechwarrior Online, for better or worse, is a game that takes place in the Battletech universe. There are just some things that work a specific way, EVEN IF THAT WAY SEEMS STUPID TO YOU.

I get this too. Probably better than most. I have 2500 matches in my HBK 4P, and at least 2000 of them are in my favorite build, being:
2 ERLL
2 ML (in arms for lights)
5 SL
And I used this build when SL did max damage at 90m. People would mock me for bringing them, and call my build stupid, but I knew better. When I got someone coming up to my face, I spammed 5 SL in them for almost no heat and crazy DPS. Even back then it was effective.

I love my playstyle in this mech. It fits me well and is extremely consistent. But I also like to experiment with other builds. These days, to be honest, I've been dropping in a different 4P build:
3MPL
6SL
This is a different style. I wouldn't say more fun, and maybe it isn't even as fun, but it is VARIETY! (Seriously, 2500 matches in 1 mech, you gotta change it up.)

All I'm saying is that if everyone could optimize their build for each map, there would develop a whole other metagame. Players that could change their playstyles for different builds would get an advantage. Players that are less effective at adapting would fail. Nothing wrong with that in a game.

Let there be co-op (I don't care)
Let there be stock only mode (I'm down)
And let there be uber-hardcore try-hard meta-game-breaking face-wreck mode.

[CMDR Sunset Shimmer]

Theodore42, on 13 June 2015 - 11:04 AM, said:

I get this argument. On the other hand, MWO is a game. PGI is making a co-op mode. I'm not into that, not sure if I'll like it, I'll play it, but will I like it more than the PVP modes? No way.
I would also love a stock mech only queue or mode.
But when you have a game that has the potential to be greater, why not do that?
I mean, come on! In solo queue I drop in my HBK next to SCRs


I get this too. Probably better than most. I have 2500 matches in my HBK 4P, and at least 2000 of them are in my favorite build, being:
2 ERLL
2 ML (in arms for lights)
5 SL
And I used this build when SL did max damage at 90m. People would mock me for bringing them, and call my build stupid, but I knew better. When I got someone coming up to my face, I spammed 5 SL in them for almost no heat and crazy DPS. Even back then it was effective.

I love my playstyle in this mech. It fits me well and is extremely consistent. But I also like to experiment with other builds. These days, to be honest, I've been dropping in a different 4P build:
3MPL
6SL
This is a different style. I wouldn't say more fun, and maybe it isn't even as fun, but it is VARIETY! (Seriously, 2500 matches in 1 mech, you gotta change it up.)

All I'm saying is that if everyone could optimize their build for each map, there would develop a whole other metagame. Players that could change their playstyles for different builds would get an advantage. Players that are less effective at adapting would fail. Nothing wrong with that in a game.

Let there be co-op (I don't care)
Let there be stock only mode (I'm down)
And let there be uber-hardcore try-hard meta-game-breaking face-wreck mode.

We have that last mode... it's called Community Warfare, and guess what, you CAN figure out where you're going to drop over there because it tells you what map you'll be on. You just don't really get the time to edit your mech for that. you DO get a bit of time however, to adjust your existing mechs to bring the best you can for what you're droping on.

I like the idea of a stock mech mode, but I also much prefer being able to make small edits to my mechs as well. Sized hardpoints would have fixed this entire issue, but we didn't get those. So it's up to the players to police themselves in this matter.

Of course, most players don't want to police themselves, they simply want to use the most broken, number crunched builds that output the MAXIMUM DAMAGE, like this was some lame 90's comic.

[Lyoto Machida]

Ultimatum X, on 13 June 2015 - 08:42 AM, said:

It's the other way around.


Builds that are "meta builds" have evolved specifically because players don't know what map (and in some cases mode) they will get.


Players have adapted to playing builds that perform well in most situations.


They might not be the best build in every situation, a laser vomit mech will get wrecked by a proper brawler at brawl range and out sniped by a sniper build at long range - but they do well on most maps, in most situations even if they aren't always ideal.



So if you decide to play a specialist, that's kind of on you to make it work.


If you are playing random game mode, random solo pug team composition, random map - then you should choose your build accordingly.

This right here.

Theodore42, on 13 June 2015 - 07:44 AM, said:

If you could select your loadout based on the map, there would be a lot MORE adapting going on, not less.

Probably too much adapting, tbh. The skill cap would get higher and the game would get harder, which I am always for.

But counting on newbies to know the best loadout for which map is probably a little to much to expect them to handle, which is why I don't expect a change. Not because it would make the game easier.

If you could select your loadout knowing the map ahead of time, there would be less build diversity, not more. Min/max would rule those scenarios...though, one could argue they already kinda do (depending on the pilot).

[Felio]

DAYLEET, on 13 June 2015 - 09:32 AM, said:

I never got that one, people who says camo help them identify you or not. The friend i play with always says that and often comment on some of my ridiculously bright/mismatch colors. Me ill never notice what color you are wearing, if it's moving and not blue i shoot it. i guess im like that T Rex in Jurassic Park, my vision is based on movement lol

On rare occasions, good camouflage can make it more difficult to target specific components on a small 'mech, I could probably count the times on one hand, though.

And sometimes really special camo might really help me remember a guy who shot at me, and I might focus more on him later.

So not totally pointless, but still not worth worrying about.

[Chuck Jager]

Many games are already at a 5 man lead by the time I could effectively be under 400m for decent damage. I am just glad that c-ermlas are not considered quirked or even better they are considered nerfed because 2 tons of them means that I will always be able to get some ranged damage in without completely gimping a build. Yes I do play mostly clan, because they are the most reliable and I am the least frustrated (just say no to cerllas).