Bud Crue, on 24 March 2016 - 10:02 AM, said:
Sorry the quote above is from page 1.
I think this is exactly what a lot of TT folks would like to see. Some folks see this entire game as a violation of what BT and MW is supposed to be. My views are somewhat conflicted now, but I used to be one of them
(Cranky old guy tirade to follow):
On the one hand I too once viewed MWO with a bit of derision with its failure to provide any game play value to classic BT stock builds (yes you can run them, but you are clearly at a disadvantage given the game mechanics). Now however, after a year of refusing to "play ball" with the meta, I have finally come to the cusp of learning/accepting how to play the game effectively (competently? adequately? Okay maybe just not terribly?) within the current mechanics.
Yes, I admit it:
I have come to understand and even occasionally play meta builds. To understand the need to twist and spread damage. To sword and board; to Alpha and shield. Blake and Kerensky help me, I finally get "it". I get how to play MWO and I am finally even starting to enjoy it. I am old, I am not the brightest bulb on the tree, and suborn as hell; but after a year of playing this game I finally get it.
Now however, it sounds like they are going to change a core mechanic of the game and I am not sure how I feel about that. Am I now going to have to take another year to re-learn how to do this? The new system may be an improvement, somehow. But atm I don't see how. For example, the dreaded 3LPL 4M BK build that all the clanners holler about...that's just 7 hard points and the expectation from the above posts seems to be that the new system will neuter that build (and some seem to think that is not only acceptable, but ideal). From my perspective, it is hard enough for an average player to use all the hardpoints on a mech like that, with just the heat mechanics at play, yet now we need another mechanic to further hobble it? I mean what is such a system going to do to the Nova or a Top Dog?
I am just not sure I like the sound of introducing a mechanic that not only hobbles certain mechs game play potential, but also further messes with my ability to build cool mechs (which is probably 40% of my enjoyment of the game, and why I have no problem dropping $ for 3-4 mastery packs of a single chassis just to build a bunch of different versions and then play them all). Thus far from what I have read, it seems like the new system will do both, and frankly I am feeling a wee bit to old to relearn how to appreciate this sort of thing.
(End cranky tirade. Please find your way to the nearest exit of my lawn. Thank you.)
Ironically, the Black Knight is one of those mechs where the meta build is VERY similar to a stock build.
Atlases also end up similar to stock builds with a big ballistic, and SRMs (no LRMs because they aren't worth the tonnage, and the MLs are foregone for more speed typically).
There is a stock Executioner config that had something like 3 cLPLs and 4 cERMLs. Sound close to what the best EXE build in game is? (its 2 cLPLs and 4 cERMLs, less lazors than the stock build)
Timber Wolf: Upgrade ER LLs to cLPLs, replace cMPL with 2 ER MLs, replace LRMs and Mguns for heat sinks. That doesn't sound so bad does it?
Because of the FPS nature of the game, those builds that have a little something for all ranges are NEVER going to be viable in MechWarrior. Totally makes sense why you would want that in Table Top... not so much here.
Were they ever really viable in a competitive sense in any MechWarrior game before? If you try to engage an assault mech that is outfitted with long range weapons and you have a single LRM10, who is going to win that trade? If the rest of your weapons are SRMs, AC20 and MLs, wouldn't you rather just focus on those and use positioning to get closer? This game allows you to do that now, so why waste the tonnage on a weapon that is not going to win trades at long range?
The "lore build being viable" argument is moot. A real time FPS is never going to reward you for being a jack of all trades. You want to master a range bracket, and use positioning to maintain that range from the other team.
The "higher TTK" argument I also find very unlikely. Given that dakka builds already have the capability to destroy mechs faster than any other type of loadout, I don't see how making people have to stare longer to deliver their damage is going to raise their TTK. Also, PPFLD becomes strong when lasers can't do more damage. Why bring lasers if you can snap shot PPFLD?
Damia Savon, on 24 March 2016 - 10:12 AM, said:
I'm guessing that most play the public queue or drop with friends in group, so lasers are what is seen the most. Again, it is the easiest to use and the most efficient. The rest are viable but just take a little more work. I run SRMs and AC20 on my Atleses (not Atlai
) and run SRM boats so I know how deadly some of the others can be. Never use Gauss cause I hate the charge mechanic and PPCs are annoyingly bad.
I'm all for multiple effective combos. Diversity is good.
Comb through some of the competitive matches on youtube, AS7-S with AC20+4 SRM6 (w/art) is the best brawling assault in the game. Lighter weight matches also typically end up being an SRM slugfest.
There is more variety then is immediately obvious in the solo queue or in small groups, mainly due to the fact that lasers require the least amount of coordination to be viable. But that doesn't mean that coordination with SRM brawlers is any less scary/has higher TTKs. If anything, TTK is lower. That Atlas build in your face will tear you apart.
4
One days LRMs will be useful. It is about the only optimism I have left.
