79 replies to this topic

[Solis Obscuri]

Trauglodyte, on 17 May 2016 - 05:22 PM, said:

I still don't understand why people hate on the Gargoyle and Executioner. Speed is lethal in this game. If it weren't for all of the asinine ppfl damage and alpha warriors, mechs like the Awesome would be much better. Well, if that happened and the AWS got slimmed down. But still. Speed on a big frame with lots of hurt is a scary thing.

People mainly hate on them because the Timberwolf typically outperforms both at a lower drop weight.

But they don't want to acknowledge that the Timberwolf is overperforming, so they pretend the others are "bad".

[Zibmo]

Gigashot, on 18 May 2016 - 06:51 AM, said:

this. credibility of people who do this: 0. what is it, sour grapes? you didn't get one and just want to ruin someone else's experience? there is no possible way you have accurately judged something you haven't played, in 24 hours.

If by "ruin someone else's experience" you mean "allow players to dominate other players in mechs that were release as too powerful", then yes. I think it needs a nerf. Not necessarily a big one. But it's too fast, agile and packs too big a punch to leave as is. Something's got to give.

[operatorZ]

Revis Volek, on 18 May 2016 - 07:54 AM, said:

Let me know how the NBA is making out basing rules, regulations and everything else off the NCAA.


And tell the NFL if they aren't basing their game off what happens at the college level they are doing it wrong.

Yeah not to piss in your Cheerios here but both the NFL and NHL have made rule and procedure changes that started out in the lower leagues that have been widely recognized as beneficial to both the sport and viewing pleasure. So...there's that.

[Revis Volek]

operatorZ, on 18 May 2016 - 09:42 PM, said:

Yeah not to piss in your Cheerios here but both the NFL and NHL have made rule and procedure changes that started out in the lower leagues that have been widely recognized as beneficial to both the sport and viewing pleasure. So...there's that.

I think this went over you head, seeing a good idea and not using it is just dumb. But you dont base you game on the lowest score, worst team, or guys that cant field a team.

Not really what i was talking about, just because it has to do with sports doesnt means its relevant. If someone says blah blah rules is 75% safer and will result in players NOT getting hurt and the team making more money your an arse to say no and a fool to care where it came from. But how often do you see rules changed because a team or player found an exploit, usually its not the bad ones.

[HerrRed]

Malachy Karrde, on 18 May 2016 - 03:23 PM, said:

pure Dakka Dire wolves are kinda crap imo. My dire wolf has an alpha that will punch through any armor on the first shot. The kodiaks I've faced don't stand up to that kind of firepower. I've got no fear of them in a brawl tbh

What is the build you have? I have 4 UAC10 and 4 SL and it does fine. The problem is the lack of torso twist and velocity. I was able to spread damage, the direwolf wasn't. I was able to corner poke, the DW isn't. I managed a 111 alpha build in my kdk 1 but gave it up because it was too close range and you loose speed. Now I walk around with 94 but a really long punch.

[Weeny Machine]

Assaults which turn like fat ballerinas is just wrong. It is a joke that light mechs struggle so hard to stay any meaningful time out of the firing arc of them (and heavies, too). This applies, however, not just to the Kodiak. Assaults and Heavies should turn slower so that lights and mediums have a niche again.

[Damien Tokala]

I disagree. The Kodiak is in its own spot. One variant has a very niche build which relies on autocannons. The rest are very well rounded, but Don't Excell at any one thing, save the spirit bear or the kdk5. As much as I like the spirit bear, it's lack of energy hard points and single ballistic slot make it difficult for me to feel comfortable with a build.

My kdk1s have become quad ppc snipers, and my kdk5 uses 10 med lasers.

This mech is far from overpower. It's just the fact that so many people are using their Kodiak, that we have an excess surge of assault type firepower, and the same mech type getting kills which just happens to be... Kodiak!

This mech is just slightly faster than the dire wolf, but the trade off is, it's taller, and it's wider.

I can carry more ammo in my dire for quad uac, Than I can with my Kodiak. And I don't feel comfortable taking the engine down for my Kodiak at all. I like that speed on him.

Dire wolf also carries way more, and can even carry the exact same loadout as a stock kdk1. However, this is the sad part!

The dire is more heat efficient with the kdk1s compliment as opposed to the Kodiak. As well as slightly more ammo.

So please, before you cry OP, remember... This is a mech that is out in LARGE numbers right now. It's not the mech that's overpowered, it's the fact that some matches have 4 or more mechs with assault type firepower!

[Wintersdark]

The dire isn't more heat efficient nor does it carry more ammo. Both factors are configurable on the kdk. The dires' only advantage is a smaller profile, and sheer hardpoint count.

But yeah, the numbers screw things.

First, there's a massive load on the matchmaker, and it's faulting to +/-2 tiers in every match. You can see this by how there's 5 assaults in every match, as the MM slips it's weight class bounds when it slips tier bounds.

Second, you'll get very high damage done amounts because there's so much more damage to do with 500t of assaults in every match - and often 5 heavies too.

Third, people can get rekt VERY fast when there's 10 heavies/assaults firing at them. Like I said earlier in the thread... quad Gauss KDK's aren't a super good build, but when there's four of them and a quad uac10, things just die instantly.

[Corrado]

Wintersdark, on 19 May 2016 - 05:01 AM, said:

The dire isn't more heat efficient nor does it carry more ammo. Both factors are configurable on the kdk. The dires' only advantage is a smaller profile, and sheer hardpoint count.

But yeah, the numbers screw things.

First, there's a massive load on the matchmaker, and it's faulting to +/-2 tiers in every match. You can see this by how there's 5 assaults in every match, as the MM slips it's weight class bounds when it slips tier bounds.

Second, you'll get very high damage done amounts because there's so much more damage to do with 500t of assaults in every match - and often 5 heavies too.

Third, people can get rekt VERY fast when there's 10 heavies/assaults firing at them. Like I said earlier in the thread... quad Gauss KDK's aren't a super good build, but when there's four of them and a quad uac10, things just die instantly.

this.

also, people forget that when there are a lot of assaults around, they should bring lights to counter them. not heavies, because heavies are assaults food.

[operatorZ]

Revis Volek, on 18 May 2016 - 11:47 PM, said:

I think this went over you head, seeing a good idea and not using it is just dumb. But you dont base you game on the lowest score, worst team, or guys that cant field a team.

Not really what i was talking about, just because it has to do with sports doesnt means its relevant. If someone says blah blah rules is 75% safer and will result in players NOT getting hurt and the team making more money your an arse to say no and a fool to care where it came from. But how often do you see rules changed because a team or player found an exploit, usually its not the bad ones.

No it didnt go over my head. I was just simply pointing out that your example of professional sports never taking ideas and rule changes from lower leagues, like college, is not correct. In fact professional sports can and do change their rules to reflect how the game is played in lower leagues. For example the NHL recently instituted 4v4 overtime instead of the usual 5v5, this is a major change to deciding regular season games that has had an immediate impact on how the game is played and which teams get into the playoffs, this change was first tried in the lower leagues.

I am not addressing the larger point of balancing this game. Just trying to correct a misconception that I have seen before.

[Bishop Steiner]

operatorZ, on 19 May 2016 - 06:03 AM, said:

No it didnt go over my head. I was just simply pointing out that your example of professional sports never taking ideas and rule changes from lower leagues, like college, is not correct. In fact professional sports can and do change their rules to reflect how the game is played in lower leagues. For example the NHL recently instituted 4v4 overtime instead of the usual 5v5, this is a major change to deciding regular season games that has had an immediate impact on how the game is played and which teams get into the playoffs, this change was first tried in the lower leagues.

I am not addressing the larger point of balancing this game. Just trying to correct a misconception that I have seen before.

NFL has been adopting a lot of college offensive and defensive concepts too.

Thing is, the Higher Leagues, in sports tend to be Copycat, and everyone runs CopyPasta, in pro sports too. As such, innovation seldom happens there.

But in college and minor leagues, you see all kinds of crazy. Some is spectacularly bad. Some is crazy like a fox good. And what happens is truly smart coaches will keep an eye on the lower leagues, (like Belichick. Love him or hate him, he's the smartest Xs and Os student of the game currently in the NFL) and adopts and adapts the concepts, usually being derided by the "purists", and then catching them flatfooted with those concepts.

And then the pros, being the copycats they are, start copying that.

It's beneath most of them to deign to acknowledge the idea as long as it's from a "lower player, league or coach". But as soon as one of "their own" starts succeeding with something, then it's open season.

And so it is in Esports. The majority of Comp Players are not genius innovators, themselves. Most are fundamentally good, disciplined players with great reflexes. And lots of practice time. But most aren't the idea guys. Those are a lot rarer, and many of them do glean ideas from lower tiers.

The way ego plays out, in sport and e-sports is pretty laughable, in general.

[FaithBombCRNA]

The NHL example isn't a great one. The NHL doesn't so much take ideas from the AHL, as it takes ideas that it thinks would be a good idea and gets the AHL to try them out first. Almost every rule change in the NHL over the past several years was an idea kicked around in NHL circles for years before that, and the compromise has almost always been universally to get the AHL to test it out first to gauge both the impact on the game and fan response. It works this way because the NHL has so much greater financial leverage than the AHL that they can pretty much get the AHL to do their bidding.

The NFL relationship with the NCAA is a bit different, because there is SO much money in college football that the NCAA can pretty much do it's own thing based on it's own financial interest. As such, you get a much more even relationship between each taking rules from the other. The NFL took 2-point conversions from college, while college took the 40 second play clock (for the most part) from the NFL. But you still have the idiotic differences in defining a catch between the two leagues.

[Bishop Steiner]

FaithBombCRNA, on 19 May 2016 - 07:46 AM, said:

The NHL example isn't a great one. The NHL doesn't so much take ideas from the AHL, as it takes ideas that it thinks would be a good idea and gets the AHL to try them out first. Almost every rule change in the NHL over the past several years was an idea kicked around in NHL circles for years before that, and the compromise has almost always been universally to get the AHL to test it out first to gauge both the impact on the game and fan response. It works this way because the NHL has so much greater financial leverage than the AHL that they can pretty much get the AHL to do their bidding.

The NFL relationship with the NCAA is a bit different, because there is SO much money in college football that the NCAA can pretty much do it's own thing based on it's own financial interest. As such, you get a much more even relationship between each taking rules from the other. The NFL took 2-point conversions from college, while college took the 40 second play clock (for the most part) from the NFL. But you still have the idiotic differences in defining a catch between the two leagues.

Meaning the nfl doesn't have a clue what's a catch or not, lol

[operatorZ]

FaithBombCRNA, on 19 May 2016 - 07:46 AM, said:

The NHL example isn't a great one. The NHL doesn't so much take ideas from the AHL, as it takes ideas that it thinks would be a good idea and gets the AHL to try them out first. Almost every rule change in the NHL over the past several years was an idea kicked around in NHL circles for years before that, and the compromise has almost always been universally to get the AHL to test it out first to gauge both the impact on the game and fan response. It works this way because the NHL has so much greater financial leverage than the AHL that they can pretty much get the AHL to do their bidding.

The NFL relationship with the NCAA is a bit different, because there is SO much money in college football that the NCAA can pretty much do it's own thing based on it's own financial interest. As such, you get a much more even relationship between each taking rules from the other. The NFL took 2-point conversions from college, while college took the 40 second play clock (for the most part) from the NFL. But you still have the idiotic differences in defining a catch between the two leagues.

Undoubtedly when it comes to AHL and NHL there is communication and pressure to try certain ideas before they reach the NHL. However, many of the AHL and NHL ideas came from the college level before they were even discussed in pro hockey circles such as the AHL and NHL. For example the two line pass was a rule that was changed to improve scoring but college hockey had no such rule and was modeled as a reason scoring would increase with the rule change.

All of which proves the point that balancing or making changes without at the very least testing ideas at lower levels of competition, if not in fact "getting" these ideas from them, is just as valid a method of management as only taking your cues from the "pros" as a way to change the game for a desired effect.

[Antares102]

Wintersdark, on 19 May 2016 - 05:01 AM, said:

The dire isn't more heat efficient nor does it carry more ammo. Both factors are configurable on the kdk. The dires' only advantage is a smaller profile, and sheer hardpoint count.

But yeah, the numbers screw things.

First, there's a massive load on the matchmaker, and it's faulting to +/-2 tiers in every match. You can see this by how there's 5 assaults in every match, as the MM slips it's weight class bounds when it slips tier bounds.

Second, you'll get very high damage done amounts because there's so much more damage to do with 500t of assaults in every match - and often 5 heavies too.

Third, people can get rekt VERY fast when there's 10 heavies/assaults firing at them. Like I said earlier in the thread... quad Gauss KDK's aren't a super good build, but when there's four of them and a quad uac10, things just die instantly.

QFT

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 17 May 2016 - 05:22 PM, said:

Sure, which suits me too. I do think the Clans would like to have one Assault Mech that actually could soak punishment, though, just saying. Kingfisher?

I personally find the Executioner pretty tanky, it just struggles a bit on build variety and can't load enough SRMs for an SRM focused brawler (which is frustrating for me).

[Bishop Steiner]

Ultimax, on 19 May 2016 - 09:08 AM, said:

I personally find the Executioner pretty tanky, it just struggles a bit on build variety and can't load enough SRMs for an SRM focused brawler (which is frustrating for me).

I'll defer to you on that. I can't do much, with consistency with EXEs personally, so am not a good judge of them, overall. Probably don't utilize the MASC well enough, I am thinking, in my playstyle.

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 May 2016 - 09:14 AM, said:

I'll defer to you on that. I can't do much, with consistency with EXEs personally, so am not a good judge of them, overall. Probably don't utilize the MASC well enough, I am thinking, in my playstyle.

No it's not just you.

I find it inconsistent too. It's tanky but it's inconsistent. It survives well enough, but its performance overall just isn't always "there".

[Wintersdark]

Ultimax, on 19 May 2016 - 09:23 AM, said:

No it's not just you.

I find it inconsistent too. It's tanky but it's inconsistent. It survives well enough, but its performance overall just isn't always "there".

That's been my problem too. I've had great matches in my exe brawler, but it's so inconsistent.

Don't really understand why, though. I mean, I've done this long enough to know when things went well because I was ignored, or when they went poorly because of things outside my control.. but I just can't seem to get what I'd consider consistent results from it.

[Widowmaker1981]

Bishop Steiner, on 19 May 2016 - 09:14 AM, said:

I'll defer to you on that. I can't do much, with consistency with EXEs personally, so am not a good judge of them, overall. Probably don't utilize the MASC well enough, I am thinking, in my playstyle.

Bishop Steiner, on 19 May 2016 - 09:14 AM, said:

I'll defer to you on that. I can't do much, with consistency with EXEs personally, so am not a good judge of them, overall. Probably don't utilize the MASC well enough, I am thinking, in my playstyle.

In my experience, the executioner has 1 build that it excels at:

EXE-PRIME
EXE-LASERFISTER(this is a variation thats a lot of a fun, but pretty risky obviously)

With the agility quirks its more agile than the Timber even before MASC, and its better armoured, and even faster in small bursts. It also jumps better than the standard 2JJ timber. The problem is its so horrendously build limited... just a one trick pony.