42 replies to this topic

[xX PUG Xx]

MrMadguy, on 24 January 2016 - 07:48 AM, said:

I'm not noob - I know, how to build Jack of all trades 'Mechs. Rules are simple. It's ballistic 'Mech? Equip Gauss. It's energy 'Mech? Equip ER-LLs. It's missile 'Mech? Equip LRMs. Mix in any proportions and you'll be decent on every map. But... As I have said thousands of times already. I DON'T WANT ALL OF MY 'MECHS TO BE EXACTLY THE SAME. Sometimes I want to play SRM+UAC5 EBJ-C. Mixing LRMs and SRMs - is just a waste of ammo tonnage. And I don't want to turn it into LRM boat - LRM boats are stupid. I have one - it's enough for me. Sorry. But it turns into complete piece of junk on maps like Alpine and Polar. It's just unfair, cuz small maps or maps with lots of cover, that supposed to be brawler-friendly, don't gimp snipers and LRM boats that way.

I didn't call you any names, my friend. Something I reserve for people I know or at least know have a sense of humour.

However you did miss my point again, so I'm going to leave it as this; if you keep walking into a plate glass door, it's not upto the door to move. Adapt to succeed, gl & hf o7.

(Yeah I know it's a little abstract )

[Deathswarrior]

xX PUG Xx, on 24 January 2016 - 07:56 AM, said:

I didn't call you any names, my friend. Something I reserve for people I know or at least know have a sense of humour.

However you did miss my point again, so I'm going to leave it as this; if you keep walking into a plate glass door, it's not upto the door to move. Adapt to succeed, gl & hf o7.

(Yeah I know it's a little abstract )

But...But...

Who closed the door?

[sycocys]

I don't really care about selecting mechs in quick drops. Just pick the one you want to run and either build it to a focus or build it balanced - that's your choice.

But it would be good be able to have some camo selections. It mostly works for lights because they are small enough to blend into the cover but the rest could benefit from being able to blend into Tourmaline with brown tones, whites for the snow maps and greys for when you are brawling in the city areas.

[Unnatural Growth]

sycocys, on 24 January 2016 - 08:06 AM, said:

I don't really care about selecting mechs in quick drops. Just pick the one you want to run and either build it to a focus or build it balanced - that's your choice.

But it would be good be able to have some camo selections. It mostly works for lights because they are small enough to blend into the cover but the rest could benefit from being able to blend into Tourmaline with brown tones, whites for the snow maps and greys for when you are brawling in the city areas.

I like playing with different camo's myself, but every mech, regardless of color or pattern, looks dark grey or black at medium to long range. So other than personal enjoyment, camos are pretty pointless.

[LordNothing]

i wouldnt mind if there were restrictions on tonnage, like +/- 10 tons max. when you have 20 of each mech class, you could pretty much have a mech for every map.

it would actually mix things up a lot. sure cold maps become energy weapon arenas, hot maps become ballistic paradise, big open maps become gauss, erll, erppc, ac2, lerm games. trenchy maps like canyon and mining might become brawl country. part of mechwarrior is to always bring the right mech to the right party. with some map variety every party doesnt have to be completely identical.

[Ted Wayz]

So I get some of the responses, other not so much.

Are people suggesting that currently people bring flexible builds on purpose? Really don't think so unless you mean laser meta vomit, especially for Clans (I have 3 Clan Large Pulse lasers, my build is flexible!). Trust me, it would be great to see more variety on the battlefield.

It would also be nice to see the person who thought the most before the match win. Not the guy with the best twitch and aim with pin point convergence. But I can understand why the meta crowd would not like the idea of having to put some effort in.

Lastly. the adapt and overcome people...really? How does the military, whose slogan you are stealing, adapt and overcome? Through bringing the right gear to the situation. I think many people, who are not veterans, do not understand what the saying means.

[EgoSlayer]

Ted Wayz, on 24 January 2016 - 08:27 AM, said:

So I get some of the responses, other not so much.

Are people suggesting that currently people bring flexible builds on purpose? Really don't think so unless you mean laser meta vomit, especially for Clans (I have 3 Clan Large Pulse lasers, my build is flexible!). Trust me, it would be great to see more variety on the battlefield.

It would also be nice to see the person who thought the most before the match win. Not the guy with the best twitch and aim with pin point convergence. But I can understand why the meta crowd would not like the idea of having to put some effort in.

Lastly. the adapt and overcome people...really? How does the military, whose slogan you are stealing, adapt and overcome? Through bringing the right gear to the situation. I think many people, who are not veterans, do not understand what the saying means.

You are missing the point many are trying to make. If you get to choose your mech after the map is selected it will be *only* extreme hyper-focused meta. Meta that is built specifically for that exact map.
By not knowing what the map is going to be ahead of time it encourages people to bring less extremely focused mechs, some say balanced builds, but in any case bringing a build that works on only a singular map is a bad idea when you don't know the map you are getting.

[adamts01]

Ted Wayz, on 24 January 2016 - 08:27 AM, said:

It would also be nice to see the person who thought the most before the match win. Not the guy with the best twitch and aim with pin point convergence. But I can understand why the meta crowd would not like the idea of having to put some effort in.

The "meta crowd" is picked on beyond belief around here. If you're talking about competition players, I guarantee they put more effort and thought in to the game than you or I do. And so what if they have the better "twitch and aim" skills? We all have things we excel at. I've fought with and against enough players well above me in skill that I know better than to claim it was because they had a "meta" build.

[Nightmare1]

Yeah, I miss the quick Mech select we had in the old Mechlab. Don't see why PGI can't insert another screen after the map select that gives you access to the quick Mech select. Just kit out four Mechs and then pick one after the map screen. You only need about 10 seconds to do it.

[Ted Wayz]

EgoSlayer, on 24 January 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

You are missing the point many are trying to make. If you get to choose your mech after the map is selected it will be *only* extreme hyper-focused meta. Meta that is built specifically for that exact map.
By not knowing what the map is going to be ahead of time it encourages people to bring less extremely focused mechs, some say balanced builds, but in any case bringing a build that works on only a singular map is a bad idea when you don't know the map you are getting.

I get what you are saying...bring moar lasers! I am guessing you are Clan which would mean even more so. This is what I see every match.

But I think you are being lazy. Please, since it so easy to think of optimized builds for every map do tell. But keep this in mind, people will have a different idea of what is optimal and that is why I think it will open up more variety in builds played.

[Ted Wayz]

adamts01, on 24 January 2016 - 08:47 AM, said:

The "meta crowd" is picked on beyond belief around here. If you're talking about competition players, I guarantee they put more effort and thought in to the game than you or I do. And so what if they have the better "twitch and aim" skills? We all have things we excel at. I've fought with and against enough players well above me in skill that I know better than to claim it was because they had a "meta" build.

My issue with the meta is the lack of variety. Bring large pulse lasers and profit.

And you can get tired of people saying, "Polar and I am in a brawler build " then watch them go sub 100 in a Dire. Good players do not care what map comes up, they make it work for them. But what percentage of players are good? And what percentage of players that cannot overcome the circumstances would you like to keep playing and keep paying? I hope you say 100%.

[adamts01]

Ted Wayz, on 24 January 2016 - 08:58 AM, said:

And what percentage of players that cannot overcome the circumstances would you like to keep playing and keep paying? I hope you say 100%.

That's honestly a tough one. I know MWO needs players but I don't want the game to cater to stupid players. If MWO went full on tactical simulator, I'd be more than happy with our current population, and I wouldn't blink an eye at a $20/month subscription.

Edit: As it is, I've put in about $200 and I'm done unless there are some big advances. Polar was a very good start for PGI, now I want to see a kick *** CW. If that happens, I'll be all over some mech packs.

Edited by adamts01, 24 January 2016 - 09:05 AM.

[EgoSlayer]

Ted Wayz, on 24 January 2016 - 08:52 AM, said:

I get what you are saying...bring moar lasers! I am guessing you are Clan which would mean even more so. This is what I see every match.

But I think you are being lazy. Please, since it so easy to think of optimized builds for every map do tell. But keep this in mind, people will have a different idea of what is optimal and that is why I think it will open up more variety in builds played.

A) Not clan, unit is just faction hopping in CW right now.
B )I'm being lazy? Sure, because I am not going to build mechs specific to each map. That is much more work and I don't do it for quick play. But it already does happen in CW. If you don't think it would be extreme meta you must not play Boreal or Vitric on CW much. Boreal is an IS ERLL meta map. First drops of mostly Battlemaster 1S. Vitric with the heat makes for Gauss or 4x UAC5 Maulers.

Just because you can't see it happening in quick play, doesn't mean it wouldn't happen. The people who don't adopt the optimum builds would lose more often than not and be forced to adopt the even more limited options of viable mechs for a particular map.

Edited by EgoSlayer, 24 January 2016 - 09:05 AM.

[Ted Wayz]

EgoSlayer, on 24 January 2016 - 09:05 AM, said:

Just because you can't see it happening in quick play, doesn't mean it wouldn't happen. The people who don't adopt the optimum builds would lose more often than not and be forced to adopt the even more limited options of viable mechs for a particular map.

Think you are taking a simplistic approach because you are only talking maps, not maps and game modes. Maps and game modes eliminate weapons and mechs by themselves. So instead of penalizing the player who brings LRMs or PPC to HPG/Conquest (which is a brawl at theta 100% of the time) why not allow them a chance to switch to a brawler? Or a sub 50kph on Polar/Conquest? That is a big map. Are you saying it is OP for people to choose a mech that cracks 60 kph so they can keep up?

Again, I think you are being lazy and now I think unimaginative. Terra Therma is a great example of a map that lends itself to a variety of builds and wouldn't be shunned except for the meta. I would love to use all maps and modes but the meta is severely limiting as to what people vote for.

Edited by Ted Wayz, 24 January 2016 - 10:36 AM.

[ProfessorD]

I'm really surprised at the hostile reaction to this idea. I think the ability to select the mech you want after learning what the map will be would make total sense. I think the restriction that you only get to select within a single weight class, and you have to pick the weight class before entering the queue, makes loads of sense and ensures that this idea remains as balanced as it could be.

In the long run, I think this game needs more ways to reward good strategy and planning, not fewer. We need to eventually have much more engaging team campaigns as part of Community Faction Warfare Play. The ability to prepare mechs for different maps and different types of engagements in advance would be an important step in that direction.

[Novakaine]

The Adventures of Pew Pew Perkins.
"Drop Commander we're over the drop zone and ready to drop.
"Alrighty then Perkins time to roll ready in 30 secs.
"Er Dc we got a problem."
"Too late for problems now Perkins."
"Seriously DC we got the wrong build outs we're all small lasers and Bright Green camo"
"What da fudge you bunch of goobers that's a polar region down there dammit."
"Sorry sir we read last week's briefing and somebody painted the lance bright green!"
"For the love of.........."
"Commander!, 4 inbound aerofighters 300 klicks out and closing fast."
"Well no time now ya chowder heads you're dropping now.
"But Commander that's suicide!"
"I can only hope.""
"Drop em"
"Commanderrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrr.!"
"Pilot get us the hell out of here."
"Sir what about Perkin's lance?"
"Who?"
"Never mind sir, boosting for high orbit, but the clown did owe me 25 credits."

[EgoSlayer]

Ted Wayz, on 24 January 2016 - 10:35 AM, said:

Think you are taking a simplistic approach because you are only talking maps, not maps and game modes. Maps and game modes eliminate weapons and mechs by themselves. So instead of penalizing the player who brings LRMs or PPC to HPG/Conquest (which is a brawl at theta 100% of the time) why not allow them a chance to switch to a brawler? Or a sub 50kph on Polar/Conquest? That is a big map. Are you saying it is OP for people to choose a mech that cracks 60 kph so they can keep up?

Again, I think you are being lazy and now I think unimaginative. Terra Therma is a great example of a map that lends itself to a variety of builds and wouldn't be shunned except for the meta. I would love to use all maps and modes but the meta is severely limiting as to what people vote for.

Sadly it's you that is being lazy and unimaginative because you can't see how effed up the game would be if everyone could choose an optimum mech for a specific purpose. Choosing a mech for a specific map *drives* specific meta, random maps *counter* specific meta. You even prove this point with your own posts stating (meta) brawlers are the wrong choice for specific circumstances.

You seem to be only thinking of meta as one LPL/Laser vomit build or something. Meta is what works best - that's it. So while the meta may change with mech selection for specific maps, it will be *much more focused and specific meta* because builds can be tailored for exactly that role. Use your imagination and think what would be "perfect" for each map/game mode and that is what the meta will be, and what people will run. Different maps will have different meta, but on each map you will see the same thing repeated by the majority of people who want to win.

It solves nothing and makes things worse because only the people with a fleet of mechs and mechbays will have all the necessary meta mechs for any encounter. Your 'good strategy and planning' means more money for PGI (players need more mechs and more configs to be competitive) and a greater separation from hardcore players and casual/new players who don't have that fleet of mechs waiting. People leaving the DWs and slow mechs behind on Polar is the exact opposite of what you are proposing - leaving them is *bad* strategy and the team with the better strategy does win.

EDIT - Note this is not 'what if' or hypothetical talk. It's what happens, you can see it in CW today. You can see it in player run leagues where the map and game type are known. I suggest you go check out some of the streams of these matches, MBRT matches for example, and try and find the diversity that some think it would create. You won't find it.

Edited by EgoSlayer, 24 January 2016 - 02:05 PM.

[MrMadguy]

EgoSlayer, on 24 January 2016 - 08:32 AM, said:

You are missing the point many are trying to make. If you get to choose your mech after the map is selected it will be *only* extreme hyper-focused meta. Meta that is built specifically for that exact map.
By not knowing what the map is going to be ahead of time it encourages people to bring less extremely focused mechs, some say balanced builds, but in any case bringing a build that works on only a singular map is a bad idea when you don't know the map you are getting.

3-4 'Mech dropdeck won't allow you to build 'Mechs for every single map in a game.

[EgoSlayer]

MrMadguy, on 24 January 2016 - 12:47 PM, said:

3-4 'Mech dropdeck won't allow you to build 'Mechs for every single map in a game.

A 4 mech drop deck of a single class pretty much would, which is what is being asked for so that the weight class matching works.

[Ted Wayz]

EgoSlayer, on 24 January 2016 - 02:00 PM, said:

A 4 mech drop deck of a single class pretty much would, which is what is being asked for so that the weight class matching works.

4 mechs cover every map and how you play every game mode for that map? And you say you can do that for every weight class? I asked before for specific examples and you passed then, here is another chance for you to show you can actually deal in specifics.

I would rather have 54 metas. You know why? Because then there isn't just one. Many metas means no meta. Can you see that?

Now put down specifics and then everyone can give you five, fifteen, fifty options better than the ones you give. We can use your examples to show how this idea is the meta destroyer. And by destroying the meta you open up the map voting. Trying to connect the dots for you.

And your complaint is a fleet of mechs? How is that a bad thing for the game? You do know how PGI makes its money right?