69 replies to this topic

[BlueStrat]

Variant1, on 01 March 2018 - 08:11 AM, said:

Im sorry but no, this would be a bad idea. It would mean everyone would make mechs to fit that map which defeats the point of having a loadout. Random is what keeps things fresh and forces people to adapt. Id much rather prefer we got random maps instead maybe even random modes as well, that way people wouldnt be able to vote for cold maps.
Which is another problem: we have too many cold maps, we need more hot ones so that loadouts are less heat intesive

Well what I see it generate in solo-QP currently is a bunch of the same vanilla mechs with the same do-it-all loadouts in every match and few mechs that are, say, brawl-specific because you might drop on Alpine or Polar with a SRM-A/AC20 and be seriously outranged and picked off as easy meat. RNGesus is fine for TT and miniatures where you aren't in a mech personally getting hammered in a totally inappropriate loadout for a map with no chance to shoot back. Alpine in solo-QP almost always has a couple mechs disco'ed because the pilots simply didn't want to play being a pinata and fodder to be farmed with little chance of reward.

[Variant1]

BlueStrat, on 02 March 2018 - 05:47 AM, said:

Well what I see it generate in solo-QP currently is a bunch of the same vanilla mechs with the same do-it-all loadouts in every match and few mechs that are, say, brawl-specific because you might drop on Alpine or Polar with a SRM-A/AC20 and be seriously outranged and picked off as easy meat. RNGesus is fine for TT and miniatures where you aren't in a mech personally getting hammered in a totally inappropriate loadout for a map with no chance to shoot back. Alpine in solo-QP almost always has a couple mechs disco'ed because the pilots simply didn't want to play being a pinata and fodder to be farmed with little chance of reward.

yes i see where your coming from though and i understand, but shame on those pilots for dcing just because they dont like a map. Its still possible to brawl on alpine just its very hard to do, there are spots though like behind hills or flanking. As for choosing loadouts in qp it would only be more long range loadouts, sure there would be brawlers if maps like river city and other good maps for it but there are too few. So what we need is more maps to have better cover to accomodate for brawling imo i just dont think having loadout choice in qp is the answer.
just my 2 cents

Edited by Variant1, 02 March 2018 - 07:07 AM.

[adamts01]

Variant1, on 01 March 2018 - 08:11 AM, said:

Im sorry but no, this would be a bad idea. It would mean everyone would make mechs to fit that map which defeats the point of having a loadout. Random is what keeps things fresh and forces people to adapt. Id much rather prefer we got random maps instead maybe even random modes as well, that way people wouldnt be able to vote for cold maps.
Which is another problem: we have too many cold maps, we need more hot ones so that loadouts are less heat intesive

I think mech switching within a weight class would greatly benefit build diversity. I would never have sold all my Atlases if I could have saved them for the few brawling maps we have. But nope, boring meta or rely on potatoes to carry your brawler on Polar.

[BlueStrat]

adamts01, on 02 March 2018 - 07:32 AM, said:

I think mech switching within a weight class would greatly benefit build diversity. I would never have sold all my Atlases if I could have saved them for the few brawling maps we have. But nope, boring meta or rely on potatoes to carry your brawler on Polar.

This. I would say restrict the choice after map selection to the variants of that specific chassis a player owns. That would give pilots a reason to own more than the one "best" (for meta do-it-all) variant of a chassis and actually see these less-used mechs in matches. I agree more maps would also help, but maps seem to be one of the slowest things to be added where variant-selection would be faster and easier, plus breathe new life into the maps we already have. Any time you can take something like that out of the hands of RNGesus and place it under the player's control, the better the experience for the player and the more depth that's added to the game IMHO.

[adamts01]

BlueStrat, on 02 March 2018 - 09:07 AM, said:

This. I would say restrict the choice after map selection to the variants of that specific chassis a player owns. That would give pilots a reason to own more than the one "best" (for meta do-it-all) variant of a chassis and actually see these less-used mechs in matches. I agree more maps would also help, but maps seem to be one of the slowest things to be added where variant-selection would be faster and easier, plus breathe new life into the maps we already have. Any time you can take something like that out of the hands of RNGesus and place it under the player's control, the better the experience for the player and the more depth that's added to the game IMHO.

I'm just considering new players with that proposal. Going back to requiring multiple variants of each chassis would be brutal on new players. That would also be a considerable buff to Clan, as many IS chassis only have 1 good variant. Another way to do it would be having a 4-mech drop deck for each weight class. Then you could select the right mech out of that group.

[BlueStrat]

adamts01, on 02 March 2018 - 04:00 PM, said:

I'm just considering new players with that proposal. Going back to requiring multiple variants of each chassis would be brutal on new players. That would also be a considerable buff to Clan, as many IS chassis only have 1 good variant.

But how is that any different than how it is now for a person with only a couple mechs? It's not "requiring" them to buy a certain number, it's just another facet of the advantage to owning more mechs in general to choose from anyway. It just tends to make that growth in owned and *used* mechs more diverse by making the less-favored variants worth more to have, use, and acquire.

Edited by BlueStrat, 02 March 2018 - 06:16 PM.

[adamts01]

BlueStrat, on 02 March 2018 - 06:13 PM, said:

But how is that any different than how it is now for a person with only a couple mechs? It's not "requiring" them to buy a certain number, it's just another facet of the advantage to owning more mechs in general to choose from anyway. It just tends to make that growth in owned and *used* mechs more diverse by making the less-favored variants worth more to have, use, and acquire.

Locking a player in to a chassis is harsh. Say a new player wants to try a sniper Raven. He'd have to then buy and level a brawling Raven to be competitive, which would be a shame if he already had a brawling MLX. Then you have chassis that are only good at brawling, like the Atlas, which would still never get taken because nothing can make that thing competitive in QP on Polar. Locking a player within his weight class is the best way to go.

[BlueStrat]

adamts01, on 02 March 2018 - 07:05 PM, said:

Locking a player in to a chassis is harsh.

Well, that's sort of my point.

*Everybody* from noob to T1 vet is locked into a single variant of a single chassis every single solo-QP match as it stands right now. Players are making that much narrower and more restrictive choice now. What I'm proposing doesn't change the choosing a chassis, it just adds the ability to choose which variant of that chassis to play for that map/mode.

That way there won't be a flood of a single chassis used for a particular map, only the choice *added* to pick a better variant/loadout for that map/mode. If players can select an entirely different chassis, they will flock to the meta chassis/variant/loadout for that map/mode and it will be cookie-cutter meta lances.

Whatever the meta chassis/variant is for that particular map/mode, that's what you'll see entire lances of if players can change chassis. The ability to switch variants of the chassis they initially selected to play is about as far as you can go and still maintain and encourage diversity among chassis in solo-QP.

Speaking of seeing an Atlas on Polar, that would nearly cease to happen if pilots can change chassis after map/mode selection, whereas being able to choose among owned variants/builds of Atlases, at least the pilot could choose a gauss/LRM Atlas, for example, for Polar instead of the AC20/SRM-A Atlas which doesn't do him or his team or even the enemy much good (little challenge or fun in dropping a brawler Atlas on Polar with ranged weapons). But, you'd still be seeing Atlases on Polar. Just better-suited Atlases. Instead of whatever meta 100T chassis/variant happens to be the FOTM.

Edited by BlueStrat, 02 March 2018 - 09:59 PM.

[RustyBolts]

I am really happy to see actual discussions on this instead of the usual temper tantrums that occur. Originally I was thinking on a class swap such as heavy for heavy. Now I am thinking more of a ton to ton swap. From your current 65 ton to any other 65 ton. I do admit that a chassis’s to chassis swap only does sound interesting as well.