Jump to content

Select Mechs After Map And Game Type


16 replies to this topic

#1 Airwolf Hawke

    Rookie

  • 1 posts

Posted 25 July 2016 - 08:48 PM

I have played Mech online from the begining (all the way from mech 2 on pc) and my one major problem is that I build mechs for a role on a given terain and play type. So I'm not going to use the same mech type/load out in Assult as I would in Conquest, as wouldnt want the same mech in a flat ground map vs a mountainus one. So randomly selecting a map and game type after I have my mech selected royaly screws my mech builds over, now I do ok and can hold my own, but its very frustrating. I get so mad at it, I leave the game for months hoping it will change. You used to be able to select what type of game you were looking for, which was great. I know why you have things setup the way yall do, to try and balance mech size and types...Now I've tried for a long while, but some game types I really hate and never used to play them, now we are forced to play them or screw over our team because we quit after joining realizing its not the game type we had hoped for, which I've thought about and havent done cause it wouldnt be fair to everyone else. So Please add the selective search feature back, that at least gives us some measure of control as to what type of mech we select for a given game type.

Airwolf

#2 Fluff My Garfield

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • 51 posts

Posted 27 July 2016 - 07:33 AM

Absolutely.

I've been thinking the same thing and it would be simple to implement too: just have a 4 mech drop deck that a player selects before searching for a game and after the map and gamemode are chosen, the player selects the 1 mech that fits it and their play style most.

People complain about "the meta" and this sort of customization would not only boost one of the BIGGEST reasons why Mechwarrior games are fun to play (customization for different challenges) but also broaden the meta dramatically. Right now, I have to build my mech as generally as possible when solo-dropping since I don't know what conditions I'm going to be dropping into. I use the laser meta like nearly everyone else so I'd run cooler mechs on hot maps or ERLL on long range maps.

#3 Hotthedd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • 3,213 posts
  • LocationDixie

Posted 27 July 2016 - 07:43 AM

Would you be okay with the probability of huge tonnage discrepancies between teams?

Would you be okay with every player switching to long range snipers or LRM boats on certain maps?

To me, it would make for some very boring games. Part of the challenge of the game is building your 'Mech so that it can be viable in every mode and on every map, if not optimized.

#4 Fluff My Garfield

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • 51 posts

Posted 27 July 2016 - 10:32 AM

View PostHotthedd, on 27 July 2016 - 07:43 AM, said:

Would you be okay with the probability of huge tonnage discrepancies between teams?


I had not considered that but my first thought is that each player will be picking the mech they feel is best for the combination of map, mode, and personal preference. One team picking largely assaults and the other largely lights for the same situation is, I would expect, a rare fluke. Lesser but still notable tonnage discrepancies would certainly happen, however, at which point the notion that a smaller mech is as useful as a larger mech would see some real testing.

Initially, I would be okay with it to see how it comes out. I expect conquest will see a huge drop in assaults and slow heavies whereas domination would be largely those. Skirmish and assault modes would stay pretty diverse, I feel, except on large or difficult maps like Terra Therma.

View PostHotthedd, on 27 July 2016 - 07:43 AM, said:

Would you be okay with every player switching to long range snipers or LRM boats on certain maps?


Yes. Posted Image I hate playing as or against both of those examples you just gave but if that is the most effective for the map then so be it.

View PostHotthedd, on 27 July 2016 - 07:43 AM, said:

To me, it would make for some very boring games. Part of the challenge of the game is building your 'Mech so that it can be viable in every mode and on every map, if not optimized.

To me part of the challenge of the game is building your mech so it is best suited to the mission at hand, instead of losing out on very viable niche builds just because occasionally maps for which it is largely unsuited come up.

#5 Hotthedd

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • 3,213 posts
  • LocationDixie

Posted 27 July 2016 - 12:07 PM

View PostOgrecorps, on 27 July 2016 - 10:32 AM, said:


I had not considered that but my first thought is that each player will be picking the mech they feel is best for the combination of map, mode, and personal preference. One team picking largely assaults and the other largely lights for the same situation is, I would expect, a rare fluke. Lesser but still notable tonnage discrepancies would certainly happen, however, at which point the notion that a smaller mech is as useful as a larger mech would see some real testing.

Initially, I would be okay with it to see how it comes out. I expect conquest will see a huge drop in assaults and slow heavies whereas domination would be largely those. Skirmish and assault modes would stay pretty diverse, I feel, except on large or difficult maps like Terra Therma.



Yes. Posted Image I hate playing as or against both of those examples you just gave but if that is the most effective for the map then so be it.


To me part of the challenge of the game is building your mech so it is best suited to the mission at hand, instead of losing out on very viable niche builds just because occasionally maps for which it is largely unsuited come up.

Well, to each their own.
Personally I would quickly lose interest in the game, and believe it would get very stale for the FOTM meta chasers as well.

#6 Spleenslitta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,617 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 28 July 2016 - 11:25 AM

I do not want that kinda thing in MWO for 2 reasons that i can think of at the moment.

1) We would get mechs specialised for each map all the time. Boating would be taken to a level were other builds cannot compete.
Right now a build with multiple weapon types can compete because they can adapt to any enviroment.

2) Some mechs and/or variants using multiple weapons types would become get severe disadvantages to the point of being completly obsolete.

#7 Seddrik

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 247 posts

Posted 28 July 2016 - 12:59 PM

A drop deck is something I though of too. As for tonnage changes... simple. Make quick drop decks be CLASS specific. All assault. All heavy. all medium or all light. Then you will not have tonnage issue, but will be allowed some options per map.

#8 Fluff My Garfield

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • 51 posts

Posted 01 August 2016 - 12:18 PM

View PostSpleenslitta, on 28 July 2016 - 11:25 AM, said:

I do not want that kinda thing in MWO for 2 reasons that i can think of at the moment.

1) We would get mechs specialised for each map all the time. Boating would be taken to a level were other builds cannot compete. Right now a build with multiple weapon types can compete because they can adapt to any enviroment.

2) Some mechs and/or variants using multiple weapons types would become get severe disadvantages to the point of being completly obsolete.


Prior to MWO I only played Mechwarrior 2 and its expansion Ghost Bear's Legacy. For this discussion there is 1 particular mission that stands out to me: defending the dropship while in space. Because of the absolute zero of space I was able to build a specialized high-heat mech just for that mission that was very satisfying to play. I was given a challenge (the mission) and a weaponized lego box of possibilities (the mechlab) with which to solve it so I purpose-built a solution that was completely nonviable in any other setting. If I had been forced to play that mission with the current effective restrictions in place in MWO, I would have had a laser meta that could only barely reach the attacking craft and wouldn't be taking full advantage of the effective heat cap available.

As things stand now, you are given a glorious box of weaponized possibilities but as soon as you start dreaming up delightful builds you start running into problems, primarily because you don't know at what ranges you're going to be engaging or how spread out the fight will be (conquest mode and Terra Therma come to mind). So you dilute your build to be not too slow, not too hot, and not too short-ranged (unless compensating with speed). And then we end up with boring generalist meta builds.

As for being afraid that a build won't be able to compete against a specialized one in its element, it's already here. That's exactly what coming up against a SRM Maddog, Archer, or Catapult amongst the buildings of River City or Frozen City is. When I play my dual guass Jager and get Polar Highlands, Alpine Peaks, or Grim Plexus I smile big. When I play small pulse laser Arctic Cheetah and get something close in with lots of elevation changes my JJ can get me over like Viridian Bog and Canyon Network, I smile big.

LIkewise, when take my LRM boat out and get Canyon Network, Crimson Straights, Tourmaline Desert, and HPG Manifold I groan, hoping for people to be to stand in the open. When I take my SRM Stormcrow and get Polar Highlands I settle in for a lot of waiting for the teams to twist in close enough to make me useful.

The reason specialization can exist now in its current form is because the maps are generally well made, resulting in a variety of close and long, high and low terrain that allows specialized and generalist builds to be effective. But some offer more of one type of terrain than others, especially around the most common engagement zones, giving a little hand to certain builds already. Originally all I wanted was to be able to go back and pick a different mech for the game mode and map that came up.

The inevitable results of that is exactly what you guys are bringing up: mobs of specialized mechs swarming around negating each others' advantages and completely shredding those unsuited to the situation. Is that a bad thing in itself? No. Building mechs to suit the application is taking the unspoken restrictions off of the weaponized legos box. The negative that it DOES bring, however is that were it to come to pass, each player would need to maintain about 5 different specialized mechs in their garage This suddenly means that in order to solo-drop competitively more is required of the player, the buy-in is higher.


View PostSeddrik, on 28 July 2016 - 12:59 PM, said:

A drop deck is something I though of too. As for tonnage changes... simple. Make quick drop decks be CLASS specific. All assault. All heavy. all medium or all light. Then you will not have tonnage issue, but will be allowed some options per map.


That is definitely a solution to the weight issue. It doesn't quite do what I want but it's a good idea.

#9 C E Dwyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 9,274 posts
  • LocationHiding in the periphery, from Bounty Hunters

Posted 01 August 2016 - 12:25 PM

No, this game is cookie cutter enough as it is what with voting for maps and modes.

Would also be pointless in buying any more mechs

#10 Spleenslitta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,617 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 01 August 2016 - 12:27 PM

View PostOgrecorps, on 01 August 2016 - 12:18 PM, said:

Lot's of stuff.

I'm sorry but not everyone enjoys playing specialist builds and more importantly don't you realise how similar each opponent is when everyone is specialising?
Whenever i play i keep seeing the same builds all over the place.

There are actually players out there who like to make mechs that can adapt to any enviroment no matter what it is.
This would almost completly ruin their chances of having fun.
Jack of all trades and ranges mechs. The mechs in the lore have a mix of different weapons so they can adapt.
Imagine if you had to play DOOM with only 1 single weapon with each playthrough...i'd say that would be quite boring.

Edited by Spleenslitta, 01 August 2016 - 12:32 PM.


#11 VonBruinwald

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Undisputed
  • The Undisputed
  • 3,460 posts
  • LocationRandis IV

Posted 01 August 2016 - 02:15 PM

View PostSpleenslitta, on 01 August 2016 - 12:27 PM, said:

There are actually players out there who like to make mechs that can adapt to any enviroment no matter what it is.
This would almost completly ruin their chances of having fun.
Jack of all trades and ranges mechs. The mechs in the lore have a mix of different weapons so they can adapt.
Imagine if you had to play DOOM with only 1 single weapon with each playthrough...i'd say that would be quite boring.


+1. On that note though, maybe there is a way we can make this work for the min-maxing-meta-noobs:


Allow players to save an alternative loadout for each 'mech (default/alternative); all equipment is locked to each variant so you'll need 2xRadar-Derp if each version requires it.

When it come to match voting time you'll have your 4 maps, 2 modes and a new shiny button to press, "Alternative loadout", clicking it switches your mech to its alternative load-out when you drop.

If you switch your loadout you are locked out of map/mode voting (and lose any stored multipliers).
If you pick a map/mode you are locked out of switching your loadout.
Votes aren't shown until the timer ends to help prevent voips clubbing.

This allows players to pick a variant based on the potential maps they drop in without guaranteeing them an ideal situation. Doesn't penalise the jack-of-alls. And most importantly, it doesn't mess with the match-making weight balance.

#12 Spleenslitta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,617 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 02 August 2016 - 01:13 AM

View PostVonBruinwald, on 01 August 2016 - 02:15 PM, said:


+1. On that note though, maybe there is a way we can make this work for the min-maxing-meta-noobs:


Allow players to save an alternative loadout for each 'mech (default/alternative); all equipment is locked to each variant so you'll need 2xRadar-Derp if each version requires it.

When it come to match voting time you'll have your 4 maps, 2 modes and a new shiny button to press, "Alternative loadout", clicking it switches your mech to its alternative load-out when you drop.

If you switch your loadout you are locked out of map/mode voting (and lose any stored multipliers).
If you pick a map/mode you are locked out of switching your loadout.
Votes aren't shown until the timer ends to help prevent voips clubbing.

This allows players to pick a variant based on the potential maps they drop in without guaranteeing them an ideal situation. Doesn't penalise the jack-of-alls. And most importantly, it doesn't mess with the match-making weight balance.

Sounds like a decent alternative that doesn't hurt either side.

#13 Fluff My Garfield

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • 51 posts

Posted 02 August 2016 - 06:01 AM

View PostCathy, on 01 August 2016 - 12:25 PM, said:

No, this game is cookie cutter enough as it is what with voting for maps and modes. Would also be pointless in buying any more mechs


I honestly don't understand what you mean. Do you mean that certain mechs and loadouts would become the only thing that would show up in certain map/mode combinations? I don't believe that for a minute.

About 2 months ago (?) there was a sudden surge in Jenner IICs and Oxides splatting SRMs all over the place. Every game there were at least 3 and sometimes up to 8 total. It was a terribly effective build but NOT because of its own merits, because it was just surprising to go from the standard play to all of a sudden having a swarm of short things in your face. People adapted quickly and by the end of the weekend when the Jenners swarmed they were getting it back at
least as bad as they were getting it.

For every build there are COUNTLESS very legitimate counters that are going to vary in suitability based almost entirely off of the player's skill and preferred style of play. I have a friend who uses his AC/20 Blackjack as a light counter but here on the forums everyone says SSRMs are where it's at. Personally I like pulse laser but another friend like his dual LB10X. If it was decided that Arctic Cheetahs were the best thing for Tourmaline Conquest you would at most see 8 in a match and everyone else would either A) continue to play anything at all that they pleased, C ) play generalist mechs that are still able to harm the lights, or C) play any one of the countless direct counters to the accepted best mech for the map/mode combination.

This means that though the variety of mechs encountered would definitively go down, the variety of mechs one gets to play would go up, a net positive for each player’s experience. Instead of always being in a medium speed thing with medium armor and weapon range fighting things that are fast, medium, and slow, I could be in a fast thing fighting all 3 one match, a slow thing fighting 2 the next but at extreme ranges the next, and then find myself in a spotting role on a map I knew a bunch of people would bring LRM boats to after that.

Why would it be pointless to buy more mechs? All of the reasons anyone has for buying any given mech now would still exist.

View PostSpleenslitta, on 01 August 2016 - 12:27 PM, said:

I'm sorry but not everyone enjoys playing specialist builds and more importantly don't you realise how similar each opponent is when everyone is specialising? Whenever i play i keep seeing the same builds all over the place. There are actually players out there who like to make mechs that can adapt to any enviroment no matter what it is. This would almost completly ruin their chances of having fun. Jack of all trades and ranges mechs. The mechs in the lore have a mix of different weapons so they can adapt. Imagine if you had to play DOOM with only 1 single weapon with each playthrough...i'd say that would be quite boring.


It seems you guys have extremely low faith in the balance of the game. Personally, I’ve been quite impressed with the balance of the mechs, weapons, and most of the maps. All other things being equal, I can expect very similar results from playing smart in a light or a heavy, the major difference being how spastic the piloting needs to be. If the popular thing is mech A with configuration B, there are still countless options to combat it that run the full gamut of size and weapon loadout.

If I’m understanding the objection it sounds like you are saying that if people got to CHOOSE their mech, somehow there would be less choice? Right now I have rather little choice! That’s the whole point of this! Right now when I build a mech I have to build it to work on a hot map with short and long range instead of having one weapon system for each combination of heat, distance and terrain. With my drop deck idea you’d be able to look at the situation and pick and choose which very different mech you want to take to the fight. Instead of your analogy of having a single weapon for the whole game (which we have already!) it’d be like looking into the room, seeing the layout, and then opening your weapons case to pick the most appropriate tool for the job. Right now you pick a generalist weapon and wait at the door for it to open and tell you what you’re doing. “Dang. Wish I could have brought a shotgun instead.”

View PostVonBruinwald, on 01 August 2016 - 02:15 PM, said:

+1. On that note though, maybe there is a way we can make this work for the min-maxing-meta-noobs: Allow players to save an alternative loadout for each 'mech (default/alternative); all equipment is locked to each variant so you'll need 2xRadar-Derp if each version requires it. When it come to match voting time you'll have your 4 maps, 2 modes and a new shiny button to press, "Alternative loadout", clicking it switches your mech to its alternative load-out when you drop. If you switch your loadout you are locked out of map/mode voting (and lose any stored multipliers). If you pick a map/mode you are locked out of switching your loadout. Votes aren't shown until the timer ends to help prevent voips clubbing. This allows players to pick a variant based on the potential maps they drop in without guaranteeing them an ideal situation. Doesn't penalise the jack-of-alls. And most importantly, it doesn't mess with the match-making weight balance.


You had me up until all of the restrictions. I’d shut up and accept an alternate load out of a single mech but one that could be switched to after map and mode were chosen. That gives me the option for a very different build but preserves the variety it seems you all are so sure will be lost.

Edited by Ogrecorps, 02 August 2016 - 06:02 AM.


#14 Spleenslitta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 2,617 posts
  • LocationNorway

Posted 02 August 2016 - 06:49 AM

Ironicly we both put a like on VonBruinwalds idea.

#15 Fluff My Garfield

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • 51 posts

Posted 02 August 2016 - 08:49 AM

View PostSpleenslitta, on 02 August 2016 - 06:49 AM, said:

Ironicly we both put a like on VonBruinwalds idea.

Boom. And then I put a like on your comment on that fact.

I liked the first part of his idea, it is a good contribution.

The short version of all this so far is:
  • Option A - I would like to be able to choose from any 1 of 4 preselected mechs after the map and game mode are chosen. Short of that...
  • Option B - I would like to be able to choose from any 1 of 4 preselected mechs that have to be in the same weight class (Light, Medium, etc.) after the map and game mode are chosen. (Someone else's idea apparently not in this thread though). Short of that...
  • Option C - I would settle for being able to switch to an alternate loadout of the mech I launched the game search with - after the map and game mode are chosen. (VonBruinwald's idea)
The main objection I'm hearing to Option A is that giving players the choice of what they ride into battle after knowing what type of battle it will be will result in boring, everybody-running-the-same-mechs battles. My counter to that is that though there may be a very general design that is most appropriate to a map/mode combo, 1) plenty of people will stubbornly stick with what they want to play in, 2) plenty of people will run mechs that are specifically anti-that-preferred-design, and 3) the mechs, weapons, and maps (mostly) are well enough balanced that the effective difference between any possible reasonable mech and whatever the preferred idea is too small to matter.

The secondary objection I'm hearing to Option A is that the matches could be horribly out of balance, weight wise. Well, that could definitely be a problem. I want to say that it would force more cooperation to handle the unbalanced threats but that is probably much too optimistic for PUG matches. It is a valid point and one I have no answer for.

I don't remember what thread Option B was in so I don't know if people had objections to that. Off the top of my head the weight-balancing issue above comes to mind but obviously less so. Also, the primary objection for Option A comes up but might actually be worse because now instead of a player loading up their drop deck with a variety of mechs and therefore appearing in matches with different things, they would be loading up entirely on mechs with a much narrower range of roles, reducing the variety they bring to the matches and the variety the game has overall.

Option C is better than nothing. Right now I grab my medium laser meta and step through the door into unknown conditions. Option C would allow me to grab my most versatile chassis, set up 1 each fast harasser and slow brawler builds, and launch with some more visibility on what I'm walking into so I can better pick the weapon for the job.

I did, however, just realize that Option C as written horribly favors Clan mechs. If I'm limited to a Stormcrow Prime and only 2 possible builds I still have a world of options thanks to omnipods. Perhaps limiting it to stock options or just a chassis and all of its variants would work but that latter of those two is creeping too close to Option B, perhaps.

Anyway, it would be nice to make full use of the adaptability of design options to build and use mechs for certain applications. It really is one of the great strengths of the game that I feel is not being used to its fullest.

#16 StORmTrAin

    Member

  • PipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 53 posts
  • LocationAbilene, TX

Posted 03 August 2016 - 05:43 PM

Forget a drop deck, keep it simple, take whatever you want. All you need is a drop down box on the ready screen to scroll thru all your mechs. Pick whichever variant you want to. If you are allowed to see what the other team is dropping with you will have a fairly good idea about what you should take, if you know your variants well. If it's a missile boat map pick a fast medium or heavy to take out missile boats, or take a missile boat. Often a large wide open map isa missile boat map. It will become an all out war of missiles and electronics and scouting. Or not.

1) We would get mechs specialised for each map all the time. Boating would be taken to a level were other builds cannot compete. Right now a build with multiple weapon types can compete because they can adapt to any enviroment.

There's nothing wrong with a specialized mech. I particularly dislike missile boats so on a missile boat map I would take a sniper or a high mobility brawler. There are no builds that can adapt to any environment.

2) Some mechs and/or variants using multiple weapons types would become get severe disadvantages to the point of being completly obsolete.

We already have this. To master a mech you have to have 3 variants. I usually love 2 and hate the third. Some variants just suck, until somehting comes along that changes.

Tonnage is not even an issue. Lights kills assaults more often than they should be allowed to. Allow the teams to see what the other team is bringing and allow mech swaps up to the 10 second mark (for example). If you are not readied up at 10 seconds til drop, then a random trial mech is issued.

Something I don't think most of you are understanding is that just because a map is favorable for missile boats it doesn't mean everyone will be taking missile boats all the time. Missile boats can get very boring to play ICYDK. Knowing what the map is going to be can prepare you to choose weapons/mechs better suited to engage the enemy.

If players are going to push first person mode so adamantly to be more immersive then knowing your battlefield is certainly more true to life as well.

In all honesty much of the time I feel like the developers never played the old games. I could be wrong, and I probably am. It just seems like a lot of the code that was written caters more to chance than skill. I think more strategy could be implemented into the game/quickplay. Radar is another major issue (not new) I have but I guess that's a topic for another time. Right now I will just lobby for a map cycle list.

Edited by StORmTrAin, 03 August 2016 - 05:50 PM.


#17 DrFoul

    Rookie

  • 6 posts

Posted 13 July 2020 - 11:32 AM

the other option is to have mini drop decks - it seems stupid that you would go on a mission with an unsuitable mech for the job - so bundle 3 mechs that are all within 10 tonnes of each other and select one of the 3 after map selection - if you want you could also add some time for teams to decide on best tactics and mech fit - get folks talking.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users