338 replies to this topic

[Zergling]

MOBAjobg, on 26 October 2016 - 11:53 PM, said:

I'd played 4517 matches in a KDK-3 so obviously, I'm doing much better for "Assault" than the other weight classes

Players don't magically become far superior in one weight class by playing thousands of battles in the same mech; they'll show improvement across all weight classes, not just one.
The reason you scored so well in assault weight class is the KDK-3 is overpowered, nothing else.

MOBAjobg, on 26 October 2016 - 11:53 PM, said:

however I expect that my performance for the "Heavy" weight class since I've just mastered a SMN-M(L) should be in between top 5% and top 10% as well. I can't wait for next season to commence.

Given the Summoner with loyalty hardpoints is a top tier mech now, I'd expect you to do well in them.

Go ahead and share your KDK-3 versus Summoner and other mech stats though.

MOBAjobg, on 26 October 2016 - 11:53 PM, said:

I'm also confident that I can pilot both Light and Medium mechs to perform at similar standards eventually.

We'll see.

I expect my own heavy and assault performance next month will be even higher, as I expect to be mostly playing Summoners, Timber Wolves and Warhawks.

Prior to the release of the loyalty Summoners, my average match score in heavies for October was only around 260, but has since jumped up to 278.
I wouldn't be surprised if I can average around 300 if I run the Summoners exclusively.

I'm honestly not a top 5% player by any means however; I might be above average, but not great. If I'm scoring that well, it is because of the mechs I'm using, not skill.

Edited by Zergling, 27 October 2016 - 01:33 AM.

[Yosharian]

Zergling, on 27 October 2016 - 01:02 AM, said:

Given the Summoner with loyalty hardpoints is a top tier mech now, I'd expect you to do well in them.

Prior to the release of the loyalty Summoners, my average match score in heavies for October was only around 260, but has since jumped up to 278.
I wouldn't be surprised if I can average around 300 if I run the Summoners exclusively.

Summoner top tier?

6E doesn't seem that good to me.

[Widowmaker1981]

Yosharian, on 27 October 2016 - 02:43 AM, said:

Summoner top tier?

6E doesn't seem that good to me.

huh? 6E is plenty as Clan, only reason to ever need more than that is SPL vomit... the majority of Summoners are just using the chest mounts with 2xERPPC anyway

[Zergling]

Yosharian, on 27 October 2016 - 02:43 AM, said:

Summoner top tier?

6E doesn't seem that good to me.

It's the 1E in each side torso that makes it top tier, due to them being high mounted. Combined with its ER PPC quirks and high mobility, it is a very effective poke sniper.

My loyalty Summoners are currently some of my best performing mechs I have, up there with my Ebon Jaguar.

My combined stats in the Summoner F and M: 48 battles, 28 wins, 20 losses (1.40 W/L, 58.33% W/R), 49 kills, 22 deaths (2.23 K/D), 497 damage/battle.

My stats in Ebon Jaguar Prime: 27 battles, 17 wins, 10 losses (1.70 W/L, 62.96% W/R), 34 kills, 14 deaths (2.43 K/D), 505 damage/battle.

Most of my heavies are in the 300-400 damage/battle range, so if I'm achieving around 500 damage/battle with good win and kill stats, then IMO the mech is excellent.

Edited by Zergling, 27 October 2016 - 03:56 AM.

[Deathlike]

Dee Eight, on 26 October 2016 - 08:04 PM, said:

Rather be a potato than what you are.

Playing a lot of games but having a sub 1 W-L ratio doesn't make you good at understanding balance. You are more familiar with mediocrity than you are with consistent success.

Potatoes will stick around in MWO... it's not like there will be a famine anytime soon. It doesn't mean you are capable of understanding why good mechs are good or bad mechs are bad.

[Mawai]

BCAW, on 26 October 2016 - 08:46 PM, said:

Lasers have the hidden stat of accuracy? This game has near-instant pinpoint convergence you know, which many thinks is impeding balance. I am among those people. If you can properly lead your target, ballistics are just as accurate as lasers unless the space between weapons are really wide. The KDK-3's ballistic points are clustered nicely, convergence isn't much of an issue even at range vs moving targets.

You really don't want to start talking about things like accuracy and convergence. Those are part of the reason why the KDK-3 is as powerful as it is right now. Not gonna help your case in claiming the KDK-3 is balanced.

This issue with leading targets is that the ballistics then converge on the targeted terrain under the reticle. If this is close to your target then your grouping on the target will be good. If the aim point is in the distance behind your target then you may find only one or two of the ballistics hitting the target and the others flying by due to the incorrect convergence for what you want to hit.

The situation is better for grouped ballistic hardpoints ... however, even RT/LT will show significant differences in aiming due to convergence on terrain when leading a target.

From this point of view, any time you can fire a weapon with the reticle actually on the target you want to hit, the chances of all weapons hitting the target in the same component are much higher. This is always the case for lasers and sometimes the case for ballistics depending on the circumstances.

[Dee Eight]

Deathlike, on 27 October 2016 - 04:59 AM, said:

Playing a lot of games but having a sub 1 W-L ratio doesn't make you good at understanding balance. You are more familiar with mediocrity than you are with consistent success.

my w/l ratio is low because I'm constantly leveling dozens of new mechs, with new builds being experimented with. I do not just use one mech continuously because I can pump stats with it. As I already explained earlier in the thread, if I used nothing but my ARC-5W... I'd have 3-5 ratios for W/L and K/D but I see no joy in playing the same mech all the time just to impress some stattard/tiertards on a forum.

Edited by Dee Eight, 27 October 2016 - 06:53 AM.

[Clownwarlord]

Koniving, on 26 October 2016 - 05:50 PM, said:

While watching this video I noticed a phrase. "While you create more content it make it easier to create more choices." One idea also in the video is that giving more options/choices that are comprable one could combat against power creep. OK now since the weapons have not changed for awhile, PGI also has been on a constant make a mech campain (wanna buy a mech), and just slightly makign any other changes to the game; could PGI be trying to stop power creep?

Here let me put it to you this way. If PGI is trying to put in more mechs in the hope they are comparable to others before it and those to come they are giving the players more choices for the different play style of the player. In effect they would be fighting against power creep.

The only issue is that some of the comparable mechs are just not comparable. Example; you would never compare an Atlas with Locust because two different weight class, but what about Cataphract vs Summoner both 70 tons but two completely different mechs and usually played completely different ways. So in effect PGI has been fighting Power Creep if this si what they are continually dropping new mech packs. I would use a summoner SRM build or streak build to hunt light mechs, but I would use my Ilya with triple AC5s to do long range to medium range dps fire, or I would load up a dual large pulse and AC20 3D to do some brawling.

Whats your thought?

[El Bandito]

Dee Eight, on 27 October 2016 - 06:49 AM, said:

my w/l ratio is low because I'm constantly leveling dozens of new mechs, with new builds being experimented with. I do not just use one mech continuously because I can pump stats with it. As I already explained earlier in the thread, if I used nothing but my ARC-5W... I'd have 3-5 ratios for W/L and K/D but I see no joy in playing the same mech all the time just to impress some stattard/tiertards on a forum.

That is your right, of course. Still, I really doubt you can back up the underlined statement in the solo-queue--if leveling new mechs/builds alone is keeping one at T3, it also says something about skill level of the player in question. Especially since your current ARC-5W stats are far from what you are boasting to achieve.

Again, no need to prove it if you don't want to.

Edited by El Bandito, 27 October 2016 - 07:36 AM.

[Deathlike]

Dee Eight, on 27 October 2016 - 06:49 AM, said:

my w/l ratio is low because I'm constantly leveling dozens of new mechs, with new builds being experimented with. I do not just use one mech continuously because I can pump stats with it. As I already explained earlier in the thread, if I used nothing but my ARC-5W... I'd have 3-5 ratios for W/L and K/D but I see no joy in playing the same mech all the time just to impress some stattard/tiertards on a forum.

Is that your excuse for everything?

I've leveled mechs before, and while occasionally it is a hindrance, eventually it's not an issue for me.

There's not much to experiment when building for success is what I do, instead of trying to make bad builds for myself.

[Marquis De Lafayette]

It will never happen...but, I would be curious to see a QP metric of win/loss ratios based off which team had more KDK-3's. I might be alone in my thinking, but when I am in QP I always look to see how many we have on our side. If we don't have any KDK-3's I naturally think, "this might be rough". Conversely, when my side has at least 2 or more I think, "should be a win". I used to look only at the pilots on both sides to make a guess on my chances. Now, its pilots + KDK-3's

Totally, aside from the raw damage numbers the KDK-3 puts up. I think it is the mech that changes QP the most. What I mean by that is it, just changes the other sides behavior, ability to position, etc. No mech induces so much "turn and run" behavior. I have been on the recieving end of a KDK-3 many times. You see it looking at you and you know what is coming is a blinding and continuous stream of damage that you won't last long in....and where it's very hard to accurately shoot back. Even if you don't see the KDK-3, if it's hitting you. You know exactly what is torching your mech.. the suppression ability of the KDK-3 is perhaps more important than its damage abilities. Drive a KDK-3 and you will see folks start to run (or try to find a hole to hide in) the moment they think you are looking at them.

Solo QP most often just doesn't have the level of coordination and communication to deal with this mech (focus fire, etc), so it's even more of a menace in QP than in FW.

But until PGI does something about it, I will enjoy my KDK-3 to its fullest and make no apologies

[Dee Eight]

El Bandito, on 27 October 2016 - 07:29 AM, said:

That is your right, of course. Still, I really doubt you can back up the underlined statement in the

Doubt away, I really am not going to lose any sleep over the doubts of random people on a web forum.

[Deathlike]

Dee Eight, on 27 October 2016 - 08:03 AM, said:

Doubt away, I really am not going to lose any sleep over the doubts of random people on a web forum.

... and neither of us when it comes to your opinion of balance... no worries there.

[Dee Eight]

Deathlike, on 27 October 2016 - 07:33 AM, said:

Is that your excuse for everything?

That and for a VIDEO game...which I only play because its fun... I don't give a flying squirrel **** for what others consider bad builds. I'm not interested in chasing some meta only stable for some e-peen bragging on a leaderboard or other such nonsense on a niche game that has such a small demographic of people to play against. At any given time there's a few thousand people playing MWO. DOTA2 gets a million plus players online at once. If competition play interested me at all I wouldn't be wasting my time on a mech simulator with little actual content. Not to mention the fact that having hunted/been hunted by REAL people in the real world, and extracted real projectiles from my real flesh... the size of your e-peen or your W/L ratio in a particular mech, will never impress me.

Edited by Dee Eight, 27 October 2016 - 08:30 AM.

[razenWing]

El Bandito, on 24 October 2016 - 07:23 PM, said:

Been playing the KDK-3 in solo-q for a week now. There are no other explanations for stats like this.




Surely it cannot be the mech. There are plenty of forumers telling me Kodiak-3 is not OP. They speak of how easy it is to focus down the mech and how cumbersome the chassis is. I mean, there are two guys below me who did less than 400 damage in KDK-3, thus proves the mech is not OP, right?




Surely it cannot be my skills. There are plenty of forumers telling me one guy cannot make a difference in 12 v 12. Plus my eye sight is bad, and I tend to spread my shells all around like a zinc addicted porn actor. I mean ****, how else I can have an average of 812 damage per game?

Only explanation left is that of luck. Since I play on Solo-q only with KDK-3, I must be extremely lucky to get good teammates 80% of the time! Guess my new habit of praying every morning for competent teammates worked, and MM God is looking out for me, albeit only when I am playing the Kodiak-3.



But seriously, nerf KDK-3. It is an easy-mode one mouse button using OP engine of destruction. And the dakka version is not even its final form.

I know I am late to the party, and didn't read through like 8 pages of middle section so catch up on the latest point. Also, that the point I am about to make is probably raised already...

But... your argument that KDK-3 is OP rests on a 33% (1 out of 3) chance of being good?

(and nobody says one man is not important, especially when you are carrying 100 tons. you see, this game is unevenly balanced toward assault. 12 man is not 1200 tons. 12 man is more about 700 tons. So you, being an assault, is worth about 2 men. Of course, if you are in a locust, then you are statistically more garbage. but 1/6 of the fighting force is fairly significant in my book)

[Deathlike]

Dee Eight, on 27 October 2016 - 08:20 AM, said:

That and for a VIDEO game...which I only play because its fun... I don't give a flying squirrel **** for what others consider bad builds. I'm not interested in chasing some meta only stable for some e-peen bragging on a leaderboard or other such nonsense on a niche game that has such a small demographic of people to play against. At any given time there's a few thousand people playing MWO. DOTA2 gets a million plus players online at once. If competition play interested me at all I wouldn't be wasting my time on a mech simulator with little actual content. Not to mention the fact that having hunted/been hunted by REAL people in the real world, and extracted real projectiles from my real flesh... the size of your e-peen or your W/L ratio in a particular mech, will never impress me.

There's nothing wrong if people don't wants to chase the meta. That's fine and dandy. I have zero issues with that.

If you want to say LRMs are fun, that's fine too. People can like good and bad weapons all the time.

The issue I have with is when you try to say "LRMs are good" or "Kodiaks are not that strong/good". That's an issue you will be taken to task. At higher levels of gameplay... people use/abuse/exploit all the advantages that they are provided. If people deem that LRMs are awful, well... it's not that LRMs can't do damage... it's because it's not good on many situational levels. It's not because of any personal belief but mostly empirical evidence having tried it many times over under most/all situations.

This has been the same issue in other games, NOT JUST MWO and games are rebalanced from the top tier and not from the bottom tier for obvious reasons. Some people take advantage of the situation... not recognizing how good they have it, and then complain that their crutch is gone. Not everyone will have the same opinion on a matter... but at the top, there is usually a fair, complete, and thorough consensus on what is best/optimal, and what isn't. If you don't understand how players have gotten to that point... that's fine... just don't complain/tell other people that "your opinion matters"... equivalent to saying "the sky is not blue".

Just because you can't accomplish what comp players can, doesn't mean that something that's a complete outlier to the alternatives isn't the case. You simply aren't capable of exploiting it. That's a problem on your end, and not for capable players that know better.

[El Bandito]

razenWing, on 27 October 2016 - 08:24 AM, said:

I know I am late to the party, and didn't read through like 8 pages of middle section so catch up on the latest point. Also, that the point I am about to make is probably raised already...

But... your argument that KDK-3 is OP rests on a 33% (1 out of 3) chance of being good?

(and nobody says one man is not important, especially when you are carrying 100 tons. you see, this game is unevenly balanced toward assault. 12 man is not 1200 tons. 12 man is more about 700 tons. So you, being an assault, is worth about 2 men. Of course, if you are in a locust, then you are statistically more garbage. but 1/6 of the fighting force is fairly significant in my book)

1. Except KDK-3 is an outlier even for a 100 tonner. And since the game is already unevenly balanced towards 100 tonners in your words, this means balancing is definitely needed for the KDK-3.

2. That screenshot is a sarcastic jab at people who think the mech is not OP.

Edited by El Bandito, 27 October 2016 - 09:40 AM.

[Lightfoot]

Whatever folks. I don't own one, won't own one, don't have a problem killing them if I spot them. I would just hesitate to condemn a mech to the status of the Victor's first movement nerfs. It killed the Victor and it never came back. Same with Gauss Rifle, now we are getting ED instead of just making the mechs tough enough to stand up to the most basic weaponry in Battle Tech. How do you think they will be able to advance to Heavy Gauss, Heavy Lasers, ATMs, Arrow IV when the time comes? ED is set to insure that date never arrives.

So I am always going to be against any nerf that does not seem vital in MWO. I am ok with top mechs. There will always be a top mech. That is the KDK-3 I am pretty sure, but it's not a game breaker, so....

Buff the armor and structure, don't nerf the weapons and mechs and you won't need ED or most of the current nerfs. Mechs in MW3-MW4 lasted twice as long as they do in MWO so there is a problem with the mechs. Sure you could chase down the nerf weapon X, Mech X, trail for the next 6 years or you could fix it once by making them all tougher.

[El Bandito]

Lightfoot, on 27 October 2016 - 08:44 AM, said:

Whatever folks. I don't own one, won't own one, don't have a problem killing them if I spot them. I would just hesitate to condemn a mech to the status of the Victor's first movement nerfs. It killed the Victor and it never came back.

Except Victor is an 80 ton IS mech with sub par hardpoints. Difference between a Victor and KDK-3 is like day and night. Even with reduced mobility, KDK-3 will still be nothing less than T1 mech.

Lightfoot, on 27 October 2016 - 08:44 AM, said:

Buff the armor and structure, don't nerf the weapons and mechs and you won't need ED or most of the current nerfs. Mechs in MW3-MW4 lasted twice as long as they do in MWO so there is a problem with the mechs. Sure you could chase down the nerf weapon X, Mech X, trail for the next 6 years or you could fix it once by making them all tougher.

You seem to have wrong memory of previous MW games. In MW4 for example, one can core an Assault mech CT with mere two alphas. TTK in MW3 and 4 were shorter than MWO.

Edited by El Bandito, 27 October 2016 - 08:58 AM.

[Deathlike]

Lightfoot, on 27 October 2016 - 08:44 AM, said:

Whatever folks. I don't own one, won't own one, don't have a problem killing them if I spot them. I would just hesitate to condemn a mech to the status of the Victor's first movement nerfs. It killed the Victor and it never came back. Same with Gauss Rifle, now we are getting ED instead of just making the mechs tough enough to stand up to the most basic weaponry in Battle Tech. How do you think they will be able to advance to Heavy Gauss, Heavy Lasers, ATMs, Arrow IV when the time comes? ED is set to insure that date never arrives.

So I am always going to be against any nerf that does not seem vital in MWO. I am ok with top mechs. There will always be a top mech. That is the KDK-3 I am pretty sure, but it's not a game breaker, so....

Buff the armor and structure, don't nerf the weapons and mechs and you won't need ED or most of the current nerfs. Mechs in MW3-MW4 lasted twice as long as they do in MWO so there is a problem with the mechs. Sure you could chase down the nerf weapon X, Mech X, trail for the next 6 years or you could fix it once by making them all tougher.

I think that's an extreme case on the Victor. Hoverjets™ and making the Victor twist like an Atlas is not something myself and others argued for. The problem was moreso the stagnation of the meta (brawling was at a minimum, lasers weren't as good) and everything else got nerfed into the ground instead (this is a balance overlord directive, and not necessarily a player whine - even though it was prevalent). Now we have powercreep and clans, and the Victor having ZERO nerfs (all positive quirks) are not even a real consideration in mech choices (Awesomes being used in MRBC's Drop 3 is more of a consideration than a Victor - that's how far it's fallen).

MW3 and MW4 had different issues (the former had lag shooting, though boating still was the most prevalent - MW4 also boated, and had its own set of issues) and to somehow equate them to MWO is foolish.