Marquis De Lafayette, on 18 June 2017 - 02:57 PM, said:
Wow...hadn't seen that. but it would explain a lot in terms of what PGI's buff/nerf determination method is. Which seems to be to buff/ nerf until everything is finally mediocre.
Yeah. Sometimes there just aren't a lot of workable options with the hardpoints available. Some Clan Omni's have big locked engines and pretty much have to use certain weapons (or at least weapons that are low tonnage)....there just isn't a lot of workable choices sometimes. So, it's not always that popular loadout choices are really that OP....some popular loadout choices are popular really just because they are the best of the limited options available on that tonnage starved chassis.
It's less about the determination method (there isn't any logic/rhyme or reason), it's more about the process.
If you goto someone in comp and ask them to describe the positives or negatives of a mech, they could probably tell you chapter and verse how a mech stacks up.... whether it is tonnage, purpose, role... etc.
If you goto a random casual and ask them about a mech, they will tell you "this is OP" and go on to describe why, but not able to make a connection as to why that is, outside of "it's too strong" or "it's too weak" w/o any sort of reliable comparisons or understanding of the game. It's the reason why we have LRM threads of it being "OP" when the major consensus is that it is not.
In essence, if you listen to the people that don't know any better... it's not going to surprise you that their answer is effectively "because reasons" and never really state a good logical case to be done. I'm not saying a comp player isn't biased or the most effective in expressing themselves, but they have a clue and if they repeat what they understand well, then maybe there's something to it, instead of the misinformation that commonly gets spread around here.
Just saying.
2
