366 replies to this topic

[Koniving]

Zergling, on 11 February 2018 - 06:53 PM, said:

Sorry, but you are making a lot of excuses here.

It may surprise you, but a lot of the top players in the game actually often play mechs and builds that aren't 'meta' or 'top tier', because they are actually seeking some variety to alleviate repetitive boredom and increased challenge.
Likewise, many of them are leveling up through the skill tree, starting out with nothing.

Said "variety" also means that others do not know how to kill them as efficiently as meta mechs. It doesn't necessarily increase the challenge, in fact a number of non-meta builds make it easier to kill meta mechs. Sometimes it does increase the challenge, but unless they start using below maximum armor or start using standard heatsinks, they aren't looking for challenge.

If they want variety drop down a few tiers where variety actually happens. Where you can be surprised as yesterday's tier 4 build becomes tomorrow's tier 1 build. Where do you think laser vomit came from when ACs were the meta?

Quote

Despite those disadvantages, the good players in the game are still able to achieve high stats; they might not achieve as good stats as they would playing meta/top tier stuff, but they will still well above the average.


Hell, the last time I played I was leveling up one of the worst mechs in the game, the Uziel 2S, and still achieved above average stats despite being handicapped by Tier 1 matchmaking and the fact I wasn't even bothering to try to play well.
Yet I am by no means a great player; a top player would score substantially better than I did under the same circumstances, achieving stats in the top 1% despite those handicaps.

There's a reason they're achieving those 1% stats. No one knows the exact method of a random surprise build, but he still knows how to kill those meta builds built with his and other players' designs because they never change due to players being stupid about them. We also have new players jumping to tier 1 within 200 matches or less just 'cause they start with a meta build and once up there, they complain of how ****** the game is because their meta builds stop working when everyone knows how to kill them and their lack of experience.

Which goes into the point I just made to the other guy.

Dont LRM me please, on 12 February 2018 - 05:24 AM, said:

Koniving, theres nothing skillful about crushing tier 5s in a smurf account, go away.

I'm in tier 3, not tier 5, which means I face everything from tier 1 to tier 5, and since we don't have that many new players I'm more likely to find tier 1s.

You face enemies on a regular basis up to two tiers up and down from yourself. Unless the load times are over 2 minutes in which case there's no holds barred.

This account is also a Fuckload older than yours, kiddo. It's my only account and it existed before this was considered a game. Though I didn't join the forums for about 6 months.

[Koniving]

Here we go. This digs right into the point I was just making.

*Redacted*, on 03 January 2018 - 06:04 PM, said:

Baradul sometimes likes to build these - mechs with a standard engine that can keep shooting even with both STs gone.

I have tried some zombie builds (especially on my Roughneck), and except for my Crab, it seems like they always get the CT shot off first.
Am I just doing a bad job spreading the damage? Or do they lose value at the T2/T1 level because everyone can aim so well?

Koniving, on 12 February 2018 - 05:45 AM, said:

It may be that your zombie build is too obvious.

Are you using a meta zombie build? In tier 2 and tier 1, everyone knows what the meta is and how to kill it.

If they know exactly what you're using, you may as well wear signs that says "Shoot here to kill me" or "Steps to kill me."

Only just responded 'cause it went to the top of the new player thread. But a player, some months old as of when they posted, already hit tier 2 at least, and has a zombie build used by some presumably famous player. And what happens? It doesn't work because he only loses the CT. The situation involves a build that later in the thread is very obvious at first glance (it doesn't even try to hide it). The procedure is obvious. Either destroy CT or destroy leg then CT if necessary, but it isn't even fast enough as is to warrant the legging, but he got it from metamechs.

Think about that.
The build isn't good enough to perform, but it came from metamechs, it has a blarring weakness, it is easily dispatched in the "tier" it is intended for.

Isn't there something WRONG with that?

Furthermore what happens to these players, new and otherwise, that only learned how to use current meta... when the meta blatantly changes due to nerfing the meta? Well they sink and they sink hard. Where pilots that didn't "grow up" using the meta can easily adapt. I have builds that have existed for years with minimal changes. Meta swings wildly in random directions to suit whatever PGI buffed most recently or is simplest to use (until it is nerfed).

Edited by Koniving, 12 February 2018 - 05:57 AM.

[Angus McFife VI]

Koniving, on 12 February 2018 - 05:42 AM, said:

I'm in tier 3, not tier 5, which means I face everything from tier 1 to tier 5, and since we don't have that many new players I'm more likely to find tier 1s.

You face enemies on a regular basis up to two tiers up and down from yourself. Unless the load times are over 2 minutes in which case there's no holds barred.

This account is also a Fuckload older than yours, kiddo. It's my only account and it existed before this was considered a game. Though I didn't join the forums for about 6 months.

Yes, in tier 3 where you can smurf tier 4s and 5s, which is exactly what I said before. Just because some tier 1s are in there that doesn't mean anything. Anyway, you can keep destroying people who don't even have a grasp on most of the games concepts yet, just leave the actual important conversations to the big boys.

PS: I don't even play these so evil and sworn out "METAMECHS REEEEEE" I play Atlases, and at tier 1, and I have a 1.51 K/D with a 1.44 Win/Loss ratio on my Atlases (yes the stats for all of them are near identical) which are also skyrocketing up every day, so you have ZERO excuse.

Edited by Dont LRM me please, 12 February 2018 - 05:54 AM.

[Lovas]

You guys stop fighting about stupid stuff and derailing this thread - you will send it to K town!

Now this is the point of this thread...
https://leaderboard....Athe+lighthouse

Get back on topic

Edited by Lovas, 12 February 2018 - 06:01 AM.

[justcallme A S H]

Khobai, on 11 February 2018 - 03:55 PM, said:

Someone who plays solo is always going to have worse stats than someone who only plays in groups and can selectively weed out the bad players by only inviting good players into the group.

Aaaannnd once again we have old "I make up stories" to prove a point. What actual evidence are you basing this totally inaccurate statement on exactly?

Here is some actual fact based evidence for you. Now to explain what it means...

From Season 9 I've been fairly consistent, don't forget Skill Maze saw a good 10% rise in Average Match Score across the board due to survival tree. From Season 16 I have actually been experimenting as per below just to see how it would all work

Season 16 - SoloQ / GroupQ mix - High Alpha Poke - Mainly Assault some Hvy
Season 17 - SoloQ mainly - Dakka - SoloQ - Mainly Assault some Hvy
Season 18 - GroupQ only - Assault/Hvy/Med mix
Season 19 - SoloQ mainly - High Alpha / Super hot - SoloQ - Heavy mostly

Now you will see from S16 / S18 that my Average Match Score goes down yet my WLR/Survival is significantly higher... Why? There is less damage/kills to go around in a skilled 4-man in GroupQ and you win/stomp easily and survive a lot better.

If you play in groups of good players, the lower your Avg Match Score is going to be overall. Totally debunking your, once again, totally unfounded statement. A statement that is nothing more than made up hot air designed to derail threads over and over again.

A good player will always be able to achieve better stats in SoloQ over GroupQ with good players. Fact.

For the good of MWO, just stop posting rubbish please.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 12 February 2018 - 06:18 AM.

[justcallme A S H]

Oh and lighthouse - You posted up a super bad idea, outside of the safe-space of the forums.

Your idea and all it's flaws were all shown for what they were.

Just because you're mad doesn't mean the game stats need to be removed. What kinda childish overreaction is that?

[Koniving]

Dont LRM me please, on 12 February 2018 - 05:50 AM, said:

Yes, in tier 3 where you can smurf tier 4s and 5s, which is exactly what I said before. Just because some tier 1s are in there that doesn't mean anything. Anyway, you can keep destroying people who don't even have a grasp on most of the games concepts yet, just leave the actual important conversations to the big boys.

PS: I don't even play these so evil and sworn out "METAMECHS REEEEEE" I play Atlases, and at tier 1, and I have a 1.51 K/D with a 1.44 Win/Loss ratio on my Atlases (yes the stats for all of them are near identical) which are also skyrocketing up every day, so you have ZERO excuse.

Tier 4 is more likely to have veterans. Tier 5 doesn't have new players for long, and thus it muddles with players that are just pushed down due to the XP bar system that tiers run by.

If you want to face new players, tier 1 is the place to go. Seen the complaints about players rushing up?

And if you're doing so well despite swearing out meta mechs, then congratulations, you're proving my point about meta mechs.

Oh, and here I am playing alongside b33f in quickplay, whom last I knew is a tier 1 player. In that year I hadn't started tanking my stats yet.


Though I am talking with Lordred, you can see Lordred is not in the match, because I'm playing solo.


This is the mech build that b33f called an interesting brawler (thus the title of the video), and soon inspired the "wubshee" meta build and potentially (though I'm not taking credit for it) the Wubmaster. (No, far as I can see he isn't in this specific video; this is just the build he called interesting after he died and spectated me.)
Of course, this build is overly complicated because that's how I like my builds; complicated and fun to give the other guy the best chance possible. But the fact that this build not only made it up high (in a system that at the time gave you a separate 'tier' or PSR for every chassis you own [or was it weight class?]) should say quite a bit.

Sadly the PSR system was flawed, but so is the tier system, as the lower the number of matches you have the faster you can climb. It's possible to hit tier 1 (from some reports by players) within 200 matches, though the average seems closer to 300 for those that actually don't have experience. Meanwhile if I want to climb back up it'll take about 25 matches to move slightly upward and about a 50 matches of doing poorly to move slightly down. This is because I have a lot of matches, however. There is little doubt if I start a new account I could jump to tier 2 pretty quickly, potentially tier 1 (after which I'll happily sell the tier 1 account 'cause I got no use for it. Tier 2 wasn't fun or challenging, and tier 1 has more new players in it that sky rocketed up.. so I don't see any reason to want to play there.)

Edited by Koniving, 12 February 2018 - 06:32 AM.

[Angus McFife VI]

Koniving, on 12 February 2018 - 06:23 AM, said:

Tier 4 is more likely to have veterans. Tier 5 doesn't have new players for long, and thus it muddles with players that are just pushed down due to the XP bar system that tiers run by.

If you want to face new players, tier 1 is the place to go. Seen the complaints about players rushing up?

And if you're doing so well despite swearing out meta mechs, then congratulations, you're proving my point about meta mechs.

Oh, and here I am playing alongside b33f in quickplay, whom last I knew is a tier 1 player. In that year I hadn't started tanking my stats yet.


Though I am talking with Lordred, you can see Lordred is not in the match, because I'm playing solo.


This is the mech build that b33f called an interesting brawler, and soon inspired the "wubshee" meta build and potentially (though I'm not taking credit for it) the Wubmaster.

I don't give a rat's hat about the B33f complementing your build. The word of 1 good player is not worth anything, it's anecdotal.

And that's also pure ********, there are much more bad players in the lower tiers, and I know for a fact because my brother recently got into this game and at tier 4 he constantly fights people with absolutely awful positioning, sense of direction or with horrible horrible builds, like standard engine, no endo 1 AC2 1 small laser Phoenix hawks and the like. I've seen the kind of people you're fighting, they're clueless scrubs.

Edited by Dont LRM me please, 12 February 2018 - 06:52 AM.

[Arend]

Regarding Koniving, 20.000 Forum Posts vs. 1000 played Quikplay Matches shows me everything i need to know!

[Horseman]

Koniving, on 10 February 2018 - 09:06 PM, said:

Its a common phenomena. Mine get used to contradict me quite a bit.
Help a new player. "You shouldn't be helping new players your stats are terribad."
Suggest a balance change. "You suck. Herp-derp look at your stats."
Tell someone about a workaround to a bug. "You don't have any right to tell people about workarounds because stats."

Still not sure how stats qualify me or disqualify me from giving a hardware workaround, but it's happened.

Kon... there's been a few times when I saw you give advice that was just fundamentally wrong. Remember when you were talling new players the ECM nodes in the skill tree do something completely different from what they actually do?

Stats are not everything, but they are the only publicly available indicator of your in-game competence (videos and screenshots are not, given how small % of matches they represent and how easy they are to cherry-pick) - and there's definitely a correlation between that and trustworthiness of advice you provide to other players as far as builds and gameplay are concerned.

[Mystere]

Davegt27, on 11 February 2018 - 07:13 PM, said:

very cool Mystere

http://www.thrustmas...thog800x600.jpg

Cooking up different HOTAS control configurations, weapons firing solutions, and designing control panels on iPads keep the mind sharp.

It's also actually more fun that playing MWO.

Edited by Mystere, 12 February 2018 - 08:32 AM.

[Champion of Khorne Lord of Blood]

Koniving, on 12 February 2018 - 04:57 AM, said:

Try LBX's, you'd be surprised at how fast they kill once the armor is gone, and they do the same damage against armor.

If you haven't, then you speak of only the ignorance they teach.

What's important about gameplay is fun. If you're not having fun, what point is there in playing a game?
Tier 2 and up are boring as ****, the same builds day in and day out, the same ways to kill them, the same ways to deal with them. Okay close range meta, stay out of range and kill. Laser vomit meta, let them 'unload' on another player and kill them while they are overheated -- that or they kill themselves trying to shoot you. AC meta? Sneak up behind them, shoot leg, while they limp pick them apart and laugh menaically. Missile boat meta? Avoid getting locked, get into range (or stay out of range) and destroy the part with the best launchers, now pick them apart.

The list goes on and on.

I've used every weapon before, I've been here since early open beta, just a bit after you since I didn't try to get into closed beta. I've even made videos showing the effectiveness of LBX vs regular ACs, I've even calculated out that against structure LBX20 only does about 6 more damage per shot. However due to the spread LBX still takes more shots to kill someone anyway, which negates their lower heat.

As for fun, its subjective, a different thing for different people. Some enjoy a hard fight where positioning mattered a lot, along with drop calling, high levels of aim, and damage spreading, ending in a close match with only 3 people remaining and not a bit of armor anywhere on the mech. In many cases, the build doesn't matter as long as it can perform well enough to provide close matches and carry if needed rather than waddling around with 5 weapon groups.

I hate the low tiers, there's no fun for me there. Teams don't know what they're doing because the vets there are just generally bad at the game and the new players there haven't had enough time to learn everything. Teams don't know when to push or when to hold, they'll nascar around, there's just chaos everywhere. It feels like just dropping into some random deathmatch arena every man for himself rather than a team based thinking man's shooter. Yet with high tier gameplay people are on the comms calling targets, explaining a plan, suggesting pushes when we have an advantage, and trying to actually win the match. They think of their team rather than only themselves, they look for a win rather than running their troll build into some enemy.

[Koniving]

Horseman, on 12 February 2018 - 08:03 AM, said:

Kon... there's been a few times when I saw you give advice that was just fundamentally wrong. Remember when you were talling new players the ECM nodes in the skill tree do something completely different from what they actually do?

Everyone is wrong sometimes. The game constantly changes, even the stat changes for the skill tree have changed a few times. What it indicates is either the person didn't look something up that second 'cause they had the false sense of security that PGI didn't randomly change it recently with or without people knowing, misremembered, or in some cases are full of ****.

I didn't actually use the ECM nodes so I worked with an assumption and it was either off or flat out wrong and when someone pointed it out, that's when a correction is done. I don't rely on ECM to play and the skill tree was reasonably new. **** happens.

(If I'm not mistaken, like with mobility and armor quirks, ECM probably changes with mech weight class too, lemme check that)

(Nope, doesn't change)

But this does make me wonder... How did I get that wrong again? All it affects is range; pretty sure that would be what I assumed...

[ApolloKaras]

To be fair, I see this quite a bit. People referring to leaderboard data in these forums. Whether or not to remove it though? Meh. If someone uses my stats to undercut my argument without attacking the point, it doesn't say much about their criticism.

[pattonesque]

"my stats are bad because I play off-meta builds" is a v. weird thing to say because good players will generally do well even while screwing around. Meta builds are there to maximize your performance

[Bud Crue]

While I think the topic of this thread is silly, or maybe just childish, I must say that once again the community has done a bang up job of providing me with some entertaining reading and yet another example of the stupidity and subjectivity of the “posts must be constructive” requirement of the COC of this here forum. That this thread has lasted to 8 pages, given some of the posts, is down right subversive. I’m adding this sucker to the list of treads that I’m going to cite the next time I get a warning or a ban for being unconstructive.

[ApolloKaras]

Bud Crue, on 12 February 2018 - 09:16 AM, said:

While I think the topic of this thread is silly, or maybe just childish, I must say that once again the community has done a bang up job of providing me with some entertaining reading and yet another example of the stupidity and subjectivity of the “posts must be constructive” requirement of the COC of this here forum. That this thread has lasted to 8 pages, given some of the posts, is down right subversive. I’m adding this sucker to the list of treads that I’m going to cite the next time I get a warning or a ban for being unconstructive.

Yeah this should have been sent to K Town about 2 pages ago.

[Vxheous]

Koniving, you should form a team with like-minded individuals and sign up for MRBC in about 1-2 weeks. For all your theorycrafting about beating "meta" mechs, it's all it is, theorycrafting. Form a team, prove it in competitive play, and people will stop questioning your advice. Keep posting outdated videos and anecdotal evidence, and you'll keep getting the same responses.

Since you already know how to crush all meta mechs, and you say Tier 1 is full of new crappy players compared to Tier 4 "veterans" your team should be placed in somewhere between NA/EU Div A and Div C where pretty much all players are Tier 1. Should be no problems for you beating them right?

Edited by Vxheous, 12 February 2018 - 10:39 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Vxheous, on 12 February 2018 - 10:36 AM, said:

Since you already know how to crush all meta mechs, and you say Tier 1 is full of new crappy players compared to Tier 4 "veterans" your team should be placed in somewhere between NA/EU Div A and Div C where pretty much all players are Tier 1. Should be no problems for you beating them right?

lmao

I'd love to see that.

pattonesque, on 12 February 2018 - 09:08 AM, said:

"my stats are bad because I play off-meta builds" is a v. weird thing to say because good players will generally do well even while screwing around. Meta builds are there to maximize your performance

My trusty MRM St. Ives Blue typically raises my average match score.

[Jarl Dane]

We probably don't need to all pile on Koniving. Where ever his skill may rest at, he's been a very good early resource and friendly guide for many new players to the game.


Also, look, the Jarl's List is down. The Lighthouse got his way!

Edited by Mech The Dane, 12 February 2018 - 03:11 PM.