132 replies to this topic

[Dee Eight]

Deathlike, on 21 September 2016 - 02:13 PM, said:

That's a terrible awful build.

It's too slow, not mobile, and based off the worst Grasshopper variants available.

I think you're just trolling my posts to be negative at this stage. How is the same 64.7 kph speed of a 70 ton with a 280 rating engine too slow ? That's the standard speed for heavy inner sphere mechs. Six jump jets isn't mobile ? Its the highest jump range of all the variants and twice as far as the winning build. How is it the worst variant of the four? Ok its got the least agility percentages of them, but it has better arm/leg armor and CT structure bonuses than the winning 5H variant, and its weapon quirks are better I think. Also I thought you were against XL engines given how much you maligned my zeus build, yet my using a standard in the grasshopper which grew in height during the rescale is terrible ? The winning mech has a 340XL ya know !

[Deathlike]

Dee Eight, on 21 September 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

Since you mentioned alt accounts... I have to wonder if any alt forum accounts were used to up vote some entries.

I don't think people would really waste their time to double vote for builds. I didn't even vote.

Quote

Personally I consider most of the winning champions to be awful for new players. I think balanced mixed builds that TEACH players new skills are being better for them that tryhard meta only works well one way builds. and as new players are less likely to torso twist to spread damage, they're gonna face tank into a quick death with short range pulse builds.

Sometimes the meta is actually more simple that people make it out to be. Teaching people to use 3 different types of weapons due to hardpoints is not always optimal either.

Quote

How is that an overheat worry for a new player ? 16 DHS and only two fire groups needed for the mouse control. If overheat is an issue...why did BlackhawkSC's winning entry get forty votes while being less heat efficient ?! Mine has more speed, more agility, better heat efficiency, more firepower, more armor. How is learning the clan streaming ultra autocannon and its double-tap jam mechanic better for a new player than direct fire non-complicated thinking SRMs ?

New players keep firing stuff until they shut down. That's a reality. The faster one gets to shutting down (especially for a brawl build), the worse off you'll be. I'm assuming full derp here. I'm not saying veteran players would do that.

Quote

Artemis may not help the 5 pack grouping much, but the lock time reduction can be good booster for a new player, and how is it still a boat using just three LRM5s, two LLs and an Ultra-5 ? Classic boat definition to ME is ALL one weapon type or one range band and usually no backup/alternate weapons. Mine has LRMs 181-1000m range, LL at 0-473m optimal and Ultra-5 at 0-600m optimal.

LRMs are considered mid-range weapons for the purposes of effectiveness. If you're trying to use it beyond 600+m, you're wasting your ammo.

It's still a boat, by the most stringent of definitions.

Quote

As to side coring, if that's such an issue, why did the winning Zeus entry which has an XL engine manage 26 votes ? Its more of a boat than mine is with three SRM6+Artemis and 4 MPLs means if it came up against my Zeus... while it has the speed to close quickly since its got a 380XL (and I only used a 325XL), its still got to go thru all three of my weapon systems engaging it before it can even bring its MPLs to bear for minimal damage at 484m . Mine has 14DHS to manage an alpha heat load of 21 pts, while the winner has 18DHS to manage a 28 pt load. The mechlab heat efficiency math has them almost identical at 1.37 (mine) vs 1.36 (winner).

Let me put it this way.. I would NEVER vote for an LRM build. That in itself is a clue.

For the winning build in question... it's should succeed in its role, despite its limitations. I feel its undergunned, but that's the natural tradeoff of using a large engine.

Quote

My zeus variant also has the maximum structure quirks (atlas quality ones at that) of all the variants, has the only agility quirks of all the variants, and the weapon quirks are nicely balanced as well for the hardpoints. 5% ballistic velocity and cooldown, -30% jam chance, 5% energy range, 5% missile velocity and LRM spread reduction. Which with the artemis brings the LRM5 spread down even further, and if the tag laser connects also in that missile flight (up to 788 meters) then that tightens it further still. Might as well be 6 heat for 15 CT damage at that stage.

Again, I won't justify picking an build with LRMs unless... there's no other choice. In this instance, a Zeus with SRMs is a viable option.

[Deathlike]

Dee Eight, on 21 September 2016 - 02:32 PM, said:

I think you're just trolling my posts to be negative at this stage. How is the same 64.7 kph speed of a 70 ton with a 280 rating engine too slow ? That's the standard speed for heavy inner sphere mechs. Six jump jets isn't mobile ? Its the highest jump range of all the variants and twice as far as the winning build. How is it the worst variant of the four? Ok its got the least agility percentages of them, but it has better arm/leg armor and CT structure bonuses than the winning 5H variant, and its weapon quirks are better I think. Also I thought you were against XL engines given how much you maligned my zeus build, yet my using a standard in the grasshopper which grew in height during the rescale is terrible ? The winning mech has a 340XL ya know !

Even the slowest of usable Grasshopper builds use a 300 engine.

Also, torso mounts are significantly more useful than arm mounts... especially on the Grasshopper. That's why the 5H is recommended for pretty anything Grasshopper related.

When it comes to mech building, bad mech building overvalues things that are irrelevant (like having 12 JJs on a Spider-5V) than things that are critical important (weapon placement). You can feel free to disagree, but it's not being a mech snob.. it's knowing what things can do a better job. The 5J is not one of those variants.

Grasshopper is very much XL-friendly anyways.

Anyways, this isn't trolling, unless you think your builds are like top-tier or something... because those builds troll other people, but are still not good.

Edited by Deathlike, 21 September 2016 - 02:46 PM.

[S 0 L E N Y A]

How is any of this news?

For the longest time now the champ builds have been comp/meta builds.

And that is what they are precisely designed to be: the most optimized build for any given mech.


Maybe PGI can come up with a new (::cough money grab cough: special variant, called the Baby Seal (BS).

They will always have max armor everywhere, with a perfect 50/50 armor distribution between the front and rear.

All models will only use standard engines. Even clan omnimechs will have special standard engines just for the (BS) model.

All builds must use all possible AMS hardpoints, with a minimum of 3 tons of AMS ammo per individual AMS.

No builds shall have a heat rating of less than 1.89.

[S 0 L E N Y A]

Dee Eight, on 21 September 2016 - 02:32 PM, said:

I think you're just trolling my posts to be negative at this stage. How is the same 64.7 kph speed of a 70 ton with a 280 rating engine too slow ? That's the standard speed for heavy inner sphere mechs. Six jump jets isn't mobile ? Its the highest jump range of all the variants and twice as far as the winning build. How is it the worst variant of the four? Ok its got the least agility percentages of them, but it has better arm/leg armor and CT structure bonuses than the winning 5H variant, and its weapon quirks are better I think. Also I thought you were against XL engines given how much you maligned my zeus build, yet my using a standard in the grasshopper which grew in height during the rescale is terrible ? The winning mech has a 340XL ya know !

eh, I got no ill will against you. I went back and checked, that build is just plain bad.

-No speed to keep distance to use ER-LL
-No speed to close to use small pulses.
-if you do get caught out in the open, you do not have fire power to punch your way out, and again,,, you do not have the speed to run away.
-weapons combo does not mix well
-waste of tonnage on jump jets. Jump jets suffer horribly from the rule of diminishing returns in MWO. Unless you are a light (maybe a medium) or pop-tarting, using more than 1 is not worth it.

[Dee Eight]

Deathlike, on 21 September 2016 - 02:40 PM, said:

I don't think people would really waste their time to double vote for builds. I didn't even vote.

Sometimes the meta is actually more simple that people make it out to be. Teaching people to use 3 different types of weapons due to hardpoints is not always optimal either.

New players keep firing stuff until they shut down. That's a reality. The faster one gets to shutting down (especially for a brawl build), the worse off you'll be. I'm assuming full derp here. I'm not saying veteran players would do that.

LRMs are considered mid-range weapons for the purposes of effectiveness. If you're trying to use it beyond 600+m, you're wasting your ammo.

It's still a boat, by the most stringent of definitions.

Let me put it this way.. I would NEVER vote for an LRM build. That in itself is a clue.

For the winning build in question... it's should succeed in its role, despite its limitations. I feel its undergunned, but that's the natural tradeoff of using a large engine.

Again, I won't justify picking an build with LRMs unless... there's no other choice. In this instance, a Zeus with SRMs is a viable option.

And all those reasons you've listed are clearly why you, like so many others who voted for the winners (even though you didn't vote for any of the designs) are very very far removed from new player status, new player thinking and new player teaching requirements. One of the inherent design requirements of champion builds is taking into account their usage as free trial mechs. All the ones that were voted on this recent round are things experts (not new trial mech users) would build for competitive faction play. Pulse lasers and ultra autocannons and SRMs. The only reason the trial panther snuck thru with regular PPCs and no backup is probably because the designer was trying to hit a heat goal since there's only 10 DHS and only 9 are in the engine. But still, a minimum range on the only weapon system is not a smart move for a trial mech. Few took heat efficiency into account while they were going min/max on weapons.

Fortunately PGI did put LRM mechs back into trial rotation, maybe they paid attention to forum complaints after the last champions arrived and they were all high energy builds or gauss rifles. The stalker champion is back in the pool with quad LRM10-Artemis.

[FupDup]

Boogie138, on 21 September 2016 - 03:00 PM, said:

For the longest time now the champ builds have been comp/meta builds.

Why do people keep saying this? There is not a single one of them that is worthy of competitive play. They range from absolute garbage at worst to being merely average at best.

[S 0 L E N Y A]

FupDup, on 21 September 2016 - 03:29 PM, said:

Why do people keep saying this? There is not a single one of them that is worthy of competitive play. They range from absolute garbage at worst to being merely average at best.

gauss vomit with a dead/weak side isn't used in comp?

What have I missed here?

[Deathlike]

Dee Eight, on 21 September 2016 - 03:17 PM, said:

And all those reasons you've listed are clearly why you, like so many others who voted for the winners (even though you didn't vote for any of the designs) are very very far removed from new player status, new player thinking and new player teaching requirements. One of the inherent design requirements of champion builds is taking into account their usage as free trial mechs. All the ones that were voted on this recent round are things experts (not new trial mech users) would build for competitive faction play. Pulse lasers and ultra autocannons and SRMs. The only reason the trial panther snuck thru with regular PPCs and no backup is probably because the designer was trying to hit a heat goal since there's only 10 DHS and only 9 are in the engine. But still, a minimum range on the only weapon system is not a smart move for a trial mech. Few took heat efficiency into account while they were going min/max on weapons.

Fortunately PGI did put LRM mechs back into trial rotation, maybe they paid attention to forum complaints after the last champions arrived and they were all high energy builds or gauss rifles. The stalker champion is back in the pool with quad LRM10-Artemis.

Wow, are you full of yourself?

You spent a lot of time defending your own builds as if they were even considered "good". At best, they are "mediocre" and and worst "cannon fodder".

I STILL REMEMBER how my growth in MWO happens to be... and those builds you listed do not help new players WHATSOEVER.

I may be far removed from the open beta days, but I DO see every new player with some of those terribad builds (Trebuchet Champion is at the top of my list) and ask myself... WHYYYYYYYY?????

I give a flying eff about the NPE, and I advocate for a better one more times than you linked a good mech build. Good builds lead to better building habits. Giving people "handicap" builds is bad for player retention and growth. People continue to ignore this situation all the effing time and frankly I don't understand why. Perhaps this game is trying to cater to casuals... and for sure PGI is doing a garbage job of it.

The reality is that bad builds are bad, and teaching players BAD HABITS makes them cannon fodder when they move up in Tiers. That is not a good reality, but it is what it is.

Edited by Deathlike, 21 September 2016 - 03:56 PM.

[FupDup]

Boogie138, on 21 September 2016 - 03:41 PM, said:

gauss vomit with a dead/weak side isn't used in comp?

What have I missed here?

I'll make a breakdown of each Champion variant in the game.

Locust: It was only a "meta" mech for a very brief time after the rescale.

Commando: STD engine in a 25 ton light mech? 2 ML + 1 SRM4 is also a very weak loadout.

Spider: Not enough firepower. Also, MGs are derp.

Firestarter: One that can actually almost qualify, or at least it could qualify until the rescale. It just needs better armor distribution (too much rear, needs to max out side torsos).

Jenner: This one is also an almost qualified one. Also has armor distribution issues (too much rear again). Unfortunately, hitboxes prevent non-Oxide Inner Sphere Jenners from being relevant.

Panther: A light mech with PPCs is inefficient. Plus, the Panther isn't even that great of a chassis to do it with.

Raven: The classic troll sniper. Unfortunately, these usually don't help their team much...

Mist Lynx: Meta and Mist Lynx are mutually exclusive. Also, it's a slow and fragile light that is totally reliant on short-range weapons that are carried in easily destroyed arms.

Arctic Cheetah: 6 SPL is the real optimal short-range build. 6 ERSL isn't anything to write home about.

Jenner IIC: This one is actually decent, except for hitboxes of course.

Cicada: An okay loadout, but it's not going to win tournaments anytime soon.

Blackjack: Popular in Puglandia at one time, but there are better options for AC/20 mediums.

Vindicator: The worst medium in the game, so this one is a non-starter right off the bat. It also has very little defense within 90m.

Centurion: It's underarmed. You could get a similar or better loadout on a number of other mediums. Also a bit too much rear armor.

Crab: This one was actually designed for sword-and-board LPL meta.

Enforcer: Decent one, but I don't think that it's specialized enough to fit a particular competitive strategy.

Hunchback: New players are going to trigger Ghost Heat with this thing constantly. For a laser boat with only okayish range, it's also a tad heat limited even without Ghost Heat considered.

Trebuchet: The Treb is a sad mech, so any Champion variants will inherit this. It also has low arm armor for a mech known for its big and fragile arm hitboxes. Also, LRMs are not meta at all.

Griffin: The ML's actually don't complement the SRMs are much as one might think. Not enough Splat to be a Splatbrawler, and its lasers are too easily blown off to be a laser poker. Not horrible, but it's not optimal at all.

Kintaro: Kintaros are an irrelevant chassis that most of the player base doesn't even know exists. It also suffers from LRMs and having minimal close up defense.

Shadow Hawk: The LPL and 2 AC/5 don't have that much synergy. Worse is the fact that it is pretty slow for a medium.

Wolverine: The laser arm is an easy target, even moreso due the facetime required by the lasers.

Shadow Cat: It's an average loadout on an average chassis.

Hunchback IIC: This one is decent.

Stormcrow: Contrary to popular belief, it's been out of the meta for a while. For lasers in particular there are better chassis for it.

Dragon: It's a Dragon. That should explain everything.

Quickdraw: Average.

Catapult: LRM dependence for most of its damage output. No energy weapons makes it ammo dependent.

Jagermech: A popular loadout, but it's a bit of a glass cannon.

Thunderbolt: Average loadout on a below average chassis.

Cataphract: Another average mech.

Grasshopper: SPL don't have good synergy with LPL.

Orion: Average loadout on a mediocre chassis.

Cauldron Born: This one is actually meta, or at least was back when Gauss Vomit was a thing.

Orion IIC: Okay build.

Timber Wolf: Laser vomit isn't meta anymore.

Awesome: Awesomes are not awesome.

Victor: Meh. The LPL's don't have the best synergy with the AC/20. SRMs would have been a better option.

Zeus: The chassis as a whole is mediocre.

Battlemaster: Not the best variant for this, but decent.

Stalker: Doesn't have the optimal engine rating for the Stalker chassis (STD300 is the best for it). LRMs are derpy. CT armor isn't even maxed out.

Highlander: More like Lowlander. The actual meta loadout from years ago was PPCs with UAC/5, not LPLs.

Banshee: Decent.

Atlas: It tries to be a brawler but doesn't have enough Splat for it. Rear armor is a bit too high.

King Crab: It hits hard, yeah, but there are better mechs for dakka.

Warhawk: An alright build, but this won't be winning tournaments anytime soon.

Highlander IIC: Same Hoverjets issue as the IS Highlander, along with not being that great of a chassis in general. Decent loadout though.

Daishi: The Dire Whale hasn't been meta since the Skill Tree got nerfed. The loadout it carries doesn't pack enough oompf to justify the horribly low mobility.


In conclusion, most of them are okay builds but not impressive. I will admit that I was surprised during this breakdown since I missed the fact that PGI actually went back and replaced many of the old Champs (like the LBX Cataphract, Gauss/LRM Atlas, etc.).

Also note that when talking about "competitive," we're not talking about Tier 1 of the Pug queue. We're talking about tournaments and MRBC kind of material.

[Intrepid]

Dee Eight, on 20 September 2016 - 10:51 PM, said:

The best I managed out of my seven submissions was I think TWO likes

More than likely because your builds as described suck. While you may like them they are neither good for the game nor for new players. If your own mechs follow the same pattern it would go a long way to explain your poor performance in game.

[Tesunie]

Deathlike, on 21 September 2016 - 02:40 PM, said:

It's still a boat, by the most stringent of definitions.

Okay, for the most part I'm staying out of the build debate happening here. Dee Eight should be able to defend his own builds well enough.

However, I do wonder what your definition of "boat" is when it comes to weapons in this game. 5 LRMs isn't boating LRMs. 2 LLs isn't boating lasers either (unless you are a light mech and it's the only weapons you have). A single UAC5 also isn't boating cannons either.

I'm truly curious how you can say that Zeus is a boat. The common definition of a (weapon) boat is when it is almost if not completely made up of a single weapon (type). And LRM boat will have almost if not all LRMs. A laser boat tends to have massed amounts of the same laser type, or at least strictly lasers. A ballistic/cannon/AC boat will... You get the point.

Please, inform me of your definition so I can understand your stance on this?

Deathlike, on 21 September 2016 - 02:40 PM, said:

Let me put it this way.. I would NEVER vote for an LRM build. That in itself is a clue.

For the winning build in question... it's should succeed in its role, despite its limitations. I feel its undergunned, but that's the natural tradeoff of using a large engine.


Again, I won't justify picking an build with LRMs unless... there's no other choice. In this instance, a Zeus with SRMs is a viable option.

You see, I'll have to disagree with you on this. I believe a Trial mech should be balanced and friendly to new players. This doesn't mean "best in class" design. But, things that are simple to understand, and should also bring forth a vast array of play styles (amongst them all). This should include brawling, LRMs, Snipering, Skirmishing, etc. Within some reason.

I believe that Trial mechs should have "balanced builds, that have a strong focus in a category, but still able to perform in another role slightly". Such as just adding a LL to a brawler for example (within reason of tonnage, builds, mech type, etc. Some mechs just can't do it at all, like most light mechs).

Thus, I believe if it's a well balanced LRM mech, with LRMs probably as a support weapon more than a primary focus (I don't believe in boating LRMs and only LRMs), it should be considered as a possible Trial mech.


I'll mention that I started this game back when the trials were all stock mechs. My first mech I played in this game was the Hunchback 4J. I learned how to use it well, and I optimized it's stock loadout upon purchase. It's still sitting in my mechbays, and I still use it, and I still get reliable performance from it. It's got the kind of build I feel favors new players. It might have LRMs, but it also have 5 lasers to support that. It also is best with a standard engine, and if built well can be reasonably well cooled.

Of course, I might not mind that as a trial mech, but I'd also want that to be complimented by another trial that might have more direct fire weapon. I say this because I'd rather a new player being able to choose from a variety of possible playstyles and weapon types. Let them explore and figure out what the enjoy playing and work from there. If a new player can't find a trial mech that is fun to use, they probably will drop the game.

People play games for fun. We should include that in our considerations. However, if you don't like LRMs, I wont force them on you. Just realize that some of us to enjoy their use (and can use them well). Trial mechs should reflect that as well to some extent.

Boogie138, on 21 September 2016 - 03:00 PM, said:

How is any of this news?

For the longest time now the champ builds have been comp/meta builds.

And that is what they are precisely designed to be: the most optimized build for any given mech.


Maybe PGI can come up with a new (::cough money grab cough: special variant, called the Baby Seal (BS).

They will always have max armor everywhere, with a perfect 50/50 armor distribution between the front and rear.

All models will only use standard engines. Even clan omnimechs will have special standard engines just for the (BS) model.

All builds must use all possible AMS hardpoints, with a minimum of 3 tons of AMS ammo per individual AMS.

No builds shall have a heat rating of less than 1.89.

Boogie... I'm not grasping what you are talking about here...

I'm just asking for more new player friendly mechs. Meta mechs are there for a reason, but new players wont always be able to utilize a meta mech properly. Some meta mechs would even mean a quick death, and a dead new player is frustrated and not learning (unless they watch other players and try to learn, but even then...).

Boogie138, on 21 September 2016 - 03:10 PM, said:

-waste of tonnage on jump jets. Jump jets suffer horribly from the rule of diminishing returns in MWO. Unless you are a light (maybe a medium) or pop-tarting, using more than 1 is not worth it.

I may disagree with you here a little. It depends upon what you are looking to do. I know my ® Grasshopper variant has a max XL engine and max JJ capability. It's really fun to play, and tends to hold it's own. I can jump into very unexpected places, especially when most people are thinking "only one JJ".

I think this will strongly depend upon playstyle and what one wishes to get out of it. There are times where I feel my Summoners just aren't jumpy enough, when compared to my Novas (as an example).

I see the reasoning behind your statement here, but it doesn't always hold true. There are situations and reasons to take more than a single JJ. But you have to be one to think in a manner to utilize it. (Most players don't think about JJs, besides to bobble up and down when being shot to help redirect damage, or to get themselves unstuck. Maybe occasionally to jump over a short wall. I'll use JJs to jump over buildings, and ambush from above or behind. I will even use them to jump behind an enemy mech that was facing me, spin in mid air, and land shooting their backside. Depends upon the situation and how it's being used basically.)

FupDup, on 21 September 2016 - 04:23 PM, said:

I'll make a breakdown of each Champion variant in the game.

Hunchback IIC: This one is decent.


Thunderbolt: Average loadout on a below average chassis.


Grasshopper: SPL don't have good synergy with LPL.

If I might make note:
Hunchback IIC: You do realize it has a 1/2 ton of AC10 ammo... and the rest is all UAC10 ammo? That's a big blunder right there. Surprised it got voted in with such a big issue involved. This right here kills any consideration for the mech as a trial mech. If it's corrected though...

Thunderbolt: Although I'm not sure what it's loadout is as the trial... It was once a very meta mech to take. Quirks made it super tough, and the ERPPC quirks on one made it just deadly to the extream. So many teams of pure Thunderbolts...

Grasshopper: I think (I'm not sure, been a while since I messed with my Grasshoppers) that the SPLs were added to possibly boost the LPLs up? If so, it failed on one side... Does give a bit more punch up close, but I agree that the SPLs do seem a bit odd in an otherwise decent loadout. (Admit it. Triple LPLs isn't a bad thing...)

[FupDup]

Tesunie, on 21 September 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

Thunderbolt: Although I'm not sure what it's loadout is as the trial... It was once a very meta mech to take. Quirks made it super tough, and the ERPPC quirks on one made it just deadly to the extream. So many teams of pure Thunderbolts...

The trial Thunderbolt is 3 LPL, not ERPPC.

Tesunie, on 21 September 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

Grasshopper: I think (I'm not sure, been a while since I messed with my Grasshoppers) that the SPLs were added to possibly boost the LPLs up? If so, it failed on one side... Does give a bit more punch up close, but I agree that the SPLs do seem a bit odd in an otherwise decent loadout. (Admit it. Triple LPLs isn't a bad thing...)

What I was trying to get at is that ML's would have been better for that role, since their range and beam duration are somewhat close to the IS LPL. They also have the same tonnage as the SPL.

[Tesunie]

Intrepid, on 21 September 2016 - 04:35 PM, said:

More than likely because your builds as described suck. While you may like them they are neither good for the game nor for new players. If your own mechs follow the same pattern it would go a long way to explain your poor performance in game.

Careful there. the bolded comment could be misconstrued as borderline "Name and Shame".

I know conversation can get intense and all... but please try to remain civil to each other? If you specifically don't like someone's build/concept/idea, it's far better to try to enforce positive suggestions and comments than just "it sucks".

FupDup, on 21 September 2016 - 06:03 PM, said:

The trial Thunderbolt is 3 LPL, not ERPPC.


What I was trying to get at is that ML's would have been better for that role, since their range and beam duration are somewhat close to the IS LPL. They also have the same tonnage as the SPL.

Triple LPL is kinda the Meta right now. But, without those health quirks, the Thunderbolt does seem to have fallen to the wayside again. (Why is balance so fickle! Oh... because it always is.)


Completely can agree with you there. Besides that point though, I feel the Grasshopper Trial is fairly reasonable otherwise.

[Dee Eight]

Deathlike, on 21 September 2016 - 03:55 PM, said:

Wow, are you full of yourself?

Yes. Proudly. Doesn't make me wrong though. I'm a lot closer to a new player (installed the game Jan 4th, 2016) status too.

Quote

You spent a lot of time defending your own builds as if they were even considered "good". At best, they are "mediocre" and and worst "cannon fodder".

Not uber-meta builds doesn't make them mediocre or cannon fodder. While they might not be your cup of tea, they work quite well for me.

Quote

I may be far removed from the open beta days, but I DO see every new player with some of those terribad builds (Trebuchet Champion is at the top of my list) and ask myself...

Well that Trebuchet was another designed & voted on by players build. As a fire support mech its not terrible in quick play games, the problem is that since April's patch we have had scouting mode for which its a bad 50 ton option for people to use for that. But with this patch they shuffled 75% of the trial options. Its one of 12 that have gone from the trial options. They kept the shadowcat, ebon, warhawk and the Myst Lynx. So, four keepers from before, eight new ones, and four previous champs cycled into the mix (spider, stalker, griffin, dragon).

[Deathlike]

Tesunie, on 21 September 2016 - 06:01 PM, said:

Okay, for the most part I'm staying out of the build debate happening here. Dee Eight should be able to defend his own builds well enough.

However, I do wonder what your definition of "boat" is when it comes to weapons in this game. 5 LRMs isn't boating LRMs. 2 LLs isn't boating lasers either (unless you are a light mech and it's the only weapons you have). A single UAC5 also isn't boating cannons either.

I'm truly curious how you can say that Zeus is a boat. The common definition of a (weapon) boat is when it is almost if not completely made up of a single weapon (type). And LRM boat will have almost if not all LRMs. A laser boat tends to have massed amounts of the same laser type, or at least strictly lasers. A ballistic/cannon/AC boat will... You get the point.

Please, inform me of your definition so I can understand your stance on this?

My basic definition literally is "2 or more" of the same weapon type.

This includes, but not limited to the Stock Stormcrow-Prime, and Timberwolf-Prime.

Pretty much EVERY GOOD BUILD is a boat of some sort.

Mind you, I don't have any particular issue with boats (which probably doesn't surprise anyone). It has always been the most effective things... not just on TT, but in ANY MW game. There's no shame calling a particular build a boat. That's just the nature of the beast.

Quote

You see, I'll have to disagree with you on this. I believe a Trial mech should be balanced and friendly to new players. This doesn't mean "best in class" design. But, things that are simple to understand, and should also bring forth a vast array of play styles (amongst them all). This should include brawling, LRMs, Snipering, Skirmishing, etc. Within some reason.

I believe that Trial mechs should have "balanced builds, that have a strong focus in a category, but still able to perform in another role slightly". Such as just adding a LL to a brawler for example (within reason of tonnage, builds, mech type, etc. Some mechs just can't do it at all, like most light mechs).

Thus, I believe if it's a well balanced LRM mech, with LRMs probably as a support weapon more than a primary focus (I don't believe in boating LRMs and only LRMs), it should be considered as a possible Trial mech.

It doesn't have to be the top build. I'm fine with that. I have issues with using LRMs as currently constituted due to the various things that make it ineffective. This includes, but not limited to ECM, Radar Derp, and knowing how locks are sustained. These things are not something you pick up immediately and also not the most immediately intuitive. Then there's also what happen as you move thru tiers.

Quote

I'll mention that I started this game back when the trials were all stock mechs. My first mech I played in this game was the Hunchback 4J. I learned how to use it well, and I optimized it's stock loadout upon purchase. It's still sitting in my mechbays, and I still use it, and I still get reliable performance from it. It's got the kind of build I feel favors new players. It might have LRMs, but it also have 5 lasers to support that. It also is best with a standard engine, and if built well can be reasonably well cooled.

Of course, I might not mind that as a trial mech, but I'd also want that to be complimented by another trial that might have more direct fire weapon. I say this because I'd rather a new player being able to choose from a variety of possible playstyles and weapon types. Let them explore and figure out what the enjoy playing and work from there. If a new player can't find a trial mech that is fun to use, they probably will drop the game.

People play games for fun. We should include that in our considerations. However, if you don't like LRMs, I wont force them on you. Just realize that some of us to enjoy their use (and can use them well). Trial mechs should reflect that as well to some extent.

While this is a personal preference in that LRMs should not be used for Trial Mechs, teaching players bad habits is worst thing you can do. There's nothing wrong with experimenting, as that's the ideal way of learning what works and what doesn't. However, avoiding the use of LRMs on trial mechs until they become suitable weapons is the only reason I vouch against it. Same could be said for LBX, MGs, and other such less than effective weapons.

Dee Eight, on 21 September 2016 - 06:46 PM, said:

Yes. Proudly. Doesn't make me wrong though. I'm a lot closer to a new player (installed the game Jan 4th, 2016) status too.

Bad mechs are still bad. You can pretend any which way... but as long as it's bad, it's not helpful.

Quote

Not uber-meta builds doesn't make them mediocre or cannon fodder. While they might not be your cup of tea, they work quite well for me.

What works for you makes my job easier eliminating you in combat. Why make my job even easier?

Quote

Well that Trebuchet was another designed & voted on by players build. As a fire support mech its not terrible in quick play games, the problem is that since April's patch we have had scouting mode for which its a bad 50 ton option for people to use for that. But with this patch they shuffled 75% of the trial options. Its one of 12 that have gone from the trial options. They kept the shadowcat, ebon, warhawk and the Myst Lynx. So, four keepers from before, eight new ones, and four previous champs cycled into the mix (spider, stalker, griffin, dragon).

Just because it was voted in, doesn't mean it was a good build. You're already complaining about mechs that were outvoted over your builds. So, that's not justification.

While I can't really find better Trebuchet-3M builds (I would've used the 7K instead as a base), it just reiterates the point that some variants are just not ideal to be Champion mechs.

[Dee Eight]

Intrepid, on 21 September 2016 - 04:35 PM, said:

If your own mechs follow the same pattern it would go a long way to explain your poor performance in game.

Which is better than your own so perhaps you should stick to commentary about mech builds instead, or play the game more.

[Dee Eight]

Deathlike, on 21 September 2016 - 07:11 PM, said:

It doesn't have to be the top build. I'm fine with that. I have issues with using LRMs as currently constituted due to the various things that make it ineffective. This includes, but not limited to ECM, Radar Derp, and knowing how locks are sustained. These things are not something you pick up immediately and also not the most immediately intuitive. Then there's also what happen as you move thru tiers.

Yes but how many Tier 5/4 new players (actual new players, not folks with Alt accounts) are going to own Radar Derp modules, or be running ECM mechs every game (the only trial option with it is the shadow cat). ECM doesn't make LRMs useless, it just delays the lock time. They also still dead fire just fine and that's a skill folks should learn sooner than later.

Quote

Bad mechs are still bad. You can pretend any which way... but as long as it's bad, it's not helpful.

Just because you refuse to use LRMs, doesn't make a mech bad for having them. I use LRMs just fine as do many others. I use mixed builds just fine. There's no such thing as bad mechs and bad builds, just bad players incapable of adapting to those mechs. None of my builds were limited to weapons with mininum ranges but I still watched someone in one of those Panthers yesterday pull off five kills with it.

Quote

What works for you makes my job easier eliminating you in combat. Why make my job even easier?

And how often have you managed that feat ?

[Deathlike]

Dee Eight, on 21 September 2016 - 07:33 PM, said:

Yes but how many Tier 5/4 new players (actual new players, not folks with Alt accounts) are going to own Radar Derp modules, or be running ECM mechs every game (the only trial option with it is the shadow cat). ECM doesn't make LRMs useless, it just delays the lock time. They also still dead fire just fine and that's a skill folks should learn sooner than later.

While there aren't going to be many people owning them in Tier 4/5... the perennially bad players (or ones intentionally tanking) - the few that exist... will have them.

Some people still honestly don't learn from LRMs... and there's enough LRMs are OP threads in the forums throughout its existence. So, I don't entirely buy that.

Quote

Just because you refuse to use LRMs, doesn't make a mech bad for having them. I use LRMs just fine as do many others. I use mixed builds just fine. There's no such thing as bad mechs and bad builds, just bad players incapable of adapting to those mechs. None of my builds were limited to weapons with mininum ranges but I still watched someone in one of those Panthers yesterday pull off five kills with it.

It's bad. Even for the basic trololol you can do, you're wasting tonnage that could've gone to increased DHS, engine, and other things.

There's a lot of bad play that happens in this game... and while it can be successful... a smarter opponent would prevent such things from happening.

Quote

And how often have you managed that feat ?

Probably more often than not. I'll still screw up and die, but it's easy to identify and wreck most bad builds when that happens.

[Tesunie]

Deathlike, on 21 September 2016 - 07:11 PM, said:

My basic definition literally is "2 or more" of the same weapon type.

This includes, but not limited to the Stock Stormcrow-Prime, and Timberwolf-Prime.

Pretty much EVERY GOOD BUILD is a boat of some sort.

Mind you, I don't have any particular issue with boats (which probably doesn't surprise anyone). It has always been the most effective things... not just on TT, but in ANY MW game. There's no shame calling a particular build a boat. That's just the nature of the beast.

Your definition of boat is interesting. It isn't the common conception of it. So, that is what caused the confusion.

Most people define boat by amount of a type of weapon on a mech. An all laser mech is described as a "laser boat", commonly with a "LL Boat" for better diffinition. I hear this commonly while in combat to warn teammates of a mech's loadout. "That's an LRM boat over there" for example tends to mean a mech dedicated to almost all LRMs, or has so much that they have minimum to no other defenses.

By your definition, calling out "That's an LRM boat over there" on a mech with only two LRM5 systems, but might also carry 3 LPLs may lead your team to drastic misunderstandings, resulting in possible poor actions caused by a miss-relay of information. Just... My point of view.

And no. There is no problem with being a boat, depending upon what one is seeking to do with a mech as well as what tactics one is using or situation one finds themselves in.

Deathlike, on 21 September 2016 - 07:11 PM, said:

It doesn't have to be the top build. I'm fine with that. I have issues with using LRMs as currently constituted due to the various things that make it ineffective. This includes, but not limited to ECM, Radar Derp, and knowing how locks are sustained. These things are not something you pick up immediately and also not the most immediately intuitive. Then there's also what happen as you move thru tiers.


While this is a personal preference in that LRMs should not be used for Trial Mechs, teaching players bad habits is worst thing you can do. There's nothing wrong with experimenting, as that's the ideal way of learning what works and what doesn't. However, avoiding the use of LRMs on trial mechs until they become suitable weapons is the only reason I vouch against it. Same could be said for LBX, MGs, and other such less than effective weapons.

LRMs probably could use some help in the game, but a single trial mech with some LRMs probably would still be a decent choice, if for nothing else than to let new players experience the use of LRMs, without having to pay for a mech to use them and/or the actual weapon system. And it doesn't have to be a boat of LRMs, even just a small support of them could be nice for an introduction to their use and function.

As far as LRM counters...
ECM: Probably could still use more adjustments. It's not (in cannon and lore) suppose to hinder normal LRM function, only the advanced features such as Artemis, Streaks and NARC. (Can't recall if it affected TAG.) However, in this game, I do think it is needed to prevent the red pip from showing up, giving away your location. So... Meh.
Radar Dep: I feel that this has become a "must have" module. Very much like Seismic was at one more. Any module that becomes "must have" probably needs to be looked into.

As you've mentioned yourself, "balance". I kinda look into trial mechs to be mechs that can (hopefully) be mech builds that can last through balance changes and remain "reasonable". The problem when they are all "current" meta builds? That meta falls to the wayside, and so do the trials based on that meta.

Even if they "outgrow" LRMs, there should still be some LRM concepts in some trial mechs. Not always, but occasionally. It can help them in the beginning, and if they like them they can learn them. If they don't, than they will know so quickly. It's a weapon in the game, and new players should be exposed to it at least at some point (if they choose to use that mech). (Guess though why I suggest a mixed build for LRMs, instead of a focused build on LRMs?)


Then again, your opinion. I'd encourage you to vote as you feel you should (if you even decide to vote).

Dee Eight, on 21 September 2016 - 07:33 PM, said:

Yes but how many Tier 5/4 new players (actual new players, not folks with Alt accounts) are going to own Radar Derp modules, or be running ECM mechs every game (the only trial option with it is the shadow cat). ECM doesn't make LRMs useless, it just delays the lock time. They also still dead fire just fine and that's a skill folks should learn sooner than later.

Not all T4 and T5 players are going to be new players. Just saying.

And for the record, ECM make it so you (under normal conditions) unable to get a lock on your target. No lock, no missile lock. Just another FYI. And dumb firing LRMs is extremely difficult, to say the least. With how slow they move (and recall now, fast move LRMs are "OP"), by the time your LRMs even think of getting to the target, most likely they have already moved. (Unless you REALLY know what you are doing.)


There are some "bad builds", but overall most builds are up to the user to determine. A lot of my builds are considered "bad builds" by some people. But they really aren't. They are reasonable, but not configured as they see fit (has LRMs on board) or just could use a little optimizing (or so they sometimes may think). (Bad builds normally are like, a 9 TAG Hunchback or a 12 Flamer Nova...)