241 replies to this topic

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Besh, on 26 January 2024 - 11:35 PM, said:

Your definition of skill is pretty narrow if you think "charge time does not impact the skill necessary" . Ofc it does . Unless your Target is static, you need to get the timing down to hit it

The timing is a limiter, the longer the charge the more you have to rely on pre-charging on pokes because you are exposing on a poke with the intent to shoot it. It doesn't magically make it more skillful, it just limits the situations that the weapon is useful. I mean if the whole recycle time was the actual charge time, no one would use it because a charge time that long seriously limits where you can use it (for example the benefit of the light gauss having only 0.5s charge instead of the 0.75s of the gauss allows it to snap fire better).

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MrMadguy, on 26 January 2024 - 11:39 PM, said:

Not all players are competitive. Not all players ready to adapt to any Meta, devs would force on them. Sometimes players play games just because they like it. And they hate, when they're forced to play differently, just because devs assume, that it's better for game.

I'm aware not all players are competitive and some are anti-meta, but again, this is a PvP ONLY game, the whole intent is to compete against other players and catering to players who don't care about min/maxing just doesn't make sense as by their very definition, they don't care about min/maxing so why buff it? Even if someone is ingrained in a playstyle like say zerg rushing, if that playstyle is too dominant for the skill necessary, yes it should be nerfed because again, this is a PvP game, and if its power sacrifices the enjoyment out of the rest of the playerbase that doesn't just zerg rush, then tough luck.

It still sounds like what you want is just MW5. That or you aren't actually anti-meta like you say, you just want your playstyle to be the way to play the game without understanding why that is problematic for the overall health of the game.

MrMadguy, on 27 January 2024 - 01:05 AM, said:

Close distance doesn't make long range weapons bad. That's why they're universal, so they're always useful and never waste of tonnage and slots. For example Gauss having high volley speed - little to no leading in close combat. That's why it's one of the best anti-Light weapons.

This isn't completely true, long range weapons are somewhat harder to use at shorter distances. It's not crazy but the longer duration lasers do hurt at shorter range because it is harder to track and Gauss doesn't allow for snapshots at short range which matters when lights are poking and not just blindly circling you. It's still good and one of the best anti-light weapons because it is PPFLD and can hit lights even at a distance but they aren't quite as effective at short range just due to how they shoot. Then there is the lack of DPS at short range compared to actual short range weapons.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 27 January 2024 - 08:28 AM.

[Besh]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 27 January 2024 - 08:15 AM, said:

The timing is a limiter, the longer the charge the more you have to rely on pre-charging on pokes because you are exposing on a poke with the intent to shoot it. It doesn't magically make it more skillful, it just limits the situations that the weapon is useful. I mean if the whole recycle time was the actual charge time, no one would use it because a charge time that long seriously limits where you can use it (for example the benefit of the light gauss having only 0.5s charge instead of the 0.75s of the gauss allows it to snap fire better).

Please do me the courtesy and answer the question I raised ?

What do you regard as "skill" in MW:O ?

I am asking this again since by now, it very much seems to me you change your useage of the word "skill" as it suits you . Or maybe you can't define/explain yourself what you regard as "skill"...which would be funny, but one possible exaplantion for you evading the question .

You also fail to understand how a property of the weapon - charge up for Gauss - actually contributes to the skill necessary to be able to use that weapon properly . NO matter how you put it semantically...it takes skill to time Gauss shots . Do you deny that ?

Edited by Besh, 27 January 2024 - 08:50 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Besh, on 27 January 2024 - 08:48 AM, said:

Please do me the courtesy and answer the question I raised ?

What do you regard as "skill" in MW:O ?

I am asking this again since by now, it very much seems to me you change your useage of the word "skill" as it suits you . Or maybe you can't define/explain yourself what you regard as "skill"...which would be funny, but one possible exaplantion for you evading the question .

You also fail to understand how a property of the weapon - charge up for Gauss - actually contributes to the skill necessary to be able to use that weapon properly . NO matter how you put it semantically...it takes skill to time Gauss shots . Do you deny that ?

Skill is something you have agency over. Gauss and its charge-up players play around (which takes some mechanical skill but it's not too crazy). For pokes you are pre-charging so that the timing isn't really necessary. Charge, and right as you are about to be fully charged, you want to begin your exposure, line up your shot and then fire. If you are in a firefight like a push where you can't pre-charge, you typically are training your target anyway (though you might be twisting to spread damage), so you are charging and then letting loose once you make any adjustments necessary.

The only tricky scenario is lights at short range, but in that case you are leveraging the time you can hold the charge to line up your shots. So a light circles around your back, and as soon as they do that, you begin your charge and try and move the light into your fire. This is where timing can maybe take some extra skill but again, if there is extra skill it isn't super crazy.

Same is for velocity as well, slower velocities don't make it more "skillful" to use at longer ranges, because the necessary "reads" to adjust for potential changes in direction of the target mid-flight becomes less about predicting and more about luck (because there is only so much you can predict for). This is why slow-mo PPCs just killed PPC usage, the risk was too much for the reward. Consistency is an important factor for usage of any weapon in a game. If you can't consistently land shots with a weapon, you just aren't going to use it. So velocity, charge-up, ramp-up, duration, lock-on, etc are all limiters on what is really viable for various situations compared to just hitscan PPFLD which is the most ubiquitous. To be clear, I'm not saying that those other firing mechanics don't take a little bit more skill compared to hitscan PPFLD, but the amount of extra skill is not that much, and not to the level that a lot of LRM players proport LRMs take over hitscan PPFLD.

It's also important to remember that there is a limit to what a person can do at one time. Aiming while maintaining situational awareness and positioning means that too complicated of aiming/firing mechanics or mixing too disparate of firing mechanics (or velocities) likely means you are sacrificing something else that your brain could be doing even amongst the best players.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 27 January 2024 - 10:17 AM.

[Besh]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 27 January 2024 - 10:11 AM, said:

Skill is something you have agency over. Gauss and its charge-up players play around (which takes some mechanical skill but it's not too crazy). For pokes you are pre-charging so that the timing isn't really necessary. Charge, and right as you are about to be fully charged, you want to begin your exposure, line up your shot and then fire. If you are in a firefight like a push where you can't pre-charge, you typically are training your target anyway (though you might be twisting to spread damage), so you are charging and then letting loose once you make any adjustments necessary.

The only tricky scenario is lights at short range, but in that case you are leveraging the time you can hold the charge to line up your shots. So a light circles around your back, and as soon as they do that, you begin your charge and try and move the light into your fire. This is where timing can maybe take some extra skill but again, if there is extra skill it isn't super crazy.

Same is for velocity as well, slower velocities don't make it more "skillful" to use at longer ranges, because the necessary "reads" to adjust for potential changes in direction of the target mid-flight becomes less about predicting and more about luck (because there is only so much you can predict for). This is why slow-mo PPCs just killed PPC usage, the risk was too much for the reward. Consistency is an important factor for usage of any weapon in a game. If you can't consistently land shots with a weapon, you just aren't going to use it. So velocity, charge-up, ramp-up, duration, lock-on, etc are all limiters on what is really viable for various situations compared to just hitscan PPFLD which is the most ubiquitous. To be clear, I'm not saying that those other firing mechanics don't take a little bit more skill compared to hitscan PPFLD, but the amount of extra skill is not that much, and not to the level that a lot of LRM players proport LRMs take over hitscan PPFLD.

It's also important to remember that there is a limit to what a person can do at one time. Aiming while maintaining situational awareness and positioning means that too complicated of aiming/firing mechanics or mixing too disparate of firing mechanics (or velocities) likely means you are sacrificing something else that your brain could be doing even amongst the best players.

Gish Gallop .

Simply put : to claim being able to land Gauss shots reliably wouldnt take skill...is wrong . Everything you mention in your first paragraph describes players skillfully handling the charge mechanic . Exactly because the charge timer is something one has little "agency over", being able to use Gauss to good effect reliably requires skill . And that includes being able to handle the charge mechanic .

Do you deny that ?

Edited by Besh, 27 January 2024 - 10:30 AM.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Quicksilver Aberration said:

To be clear, I'm not saying that those other firing mechanics don't take a little bit more skill compared to hitscan PPFLD, but the amount of extra skill is not that much, and not to the level that a lot of LRM players proport LRMs take over hitscan PPFLD.

Edit: Probably worth adding that the difference in values of those doesn't change the level of skill involved. For example the Heavy Gauss with its 1s charge up time is not significantly more skillful than the Light Gauss with its 0.5s, because either way you are "accounting" for that charge-up, the time is just different which can further limit what situations you can leverage those weapons. The same is true for changing lock times and time to target for lock-ons. Changing those numbers doesn't increase the skill in any meaningful way, just limits situations where you can feasibly use them otherwise what this whole hullaballo over increasing velocity or lowering lock times would be about "reducing the skill" necessary to use those weapons, and that math just doesn't math.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 27 January 2024 - 10:41 AM.

[pattonesque]

MrMadguy, on 26 January 2024 - 11:39 PM, said:

In order to change it, I would need to overcome myself.

overcoming oneself is the first step to true enlightenment

[MrMadguy]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 27 January 2024 - 08:20 AM, said:

I'm aware not all players are competitive and some are anti-meta, but again, this is a PvP ONLY game, the whole intent is to compete against other players and catering to players who don't care about min/maxing just doesn't make sense as by their very definition, they don't care about min/maxing so why buff it? Even if someone is ingrained in a playstyle like say zerg rushing, if that playstyle is too dominant for the skill necessary, yes it should be nerfed because again, this is a PvP game, and if its power sacrifices the enjoyment out of the rest of the playerbase that doesn't just zerg rush, then tough luck.

It still sounds like what you want is just MW5. That or you aren't actually anti-meta like you say, you just want your playstyle to be the way to play the game without understanding why that is problematic for the overall health of the game.


This isn't completely true, long range weapons are somewhat harder to use at shorter distances. It's not crazy but the longer duration lasers do hurt at shorter range because it is harder to track and Gauss doesn't allow for snapshots at short range which matters when lights are poking and not just blindly circling you. It's still good and one of the best anti-light weapons because it is PPFLD and can hit lights even at a distance but they aren't quite as effective at short range just due to how they shoot. Then there is the lack of DPS at short range compared to actual short range weapons.

"Everything is PVP games is about player power" - is the biggest misconception, created by 1% of top players. If all players would be thinking about their power only and would only min-maxing, then I wouldn't see so many Atlases in my matches, right? What is completely neglegated in such concepts - is player choices, that are important part of any game. As important, as player power.

[martian]

Heavy Money, on 26 January 2024 - 05:33 PM, said:

90% of discourse on this forum is simply:

"This thing feels really unbalanced and unfair, what is going on?"
"It isn't, don't worry. You just aren't very good. If you do xyz and improve, you'll not have a problem with that thing anymore."
"OMG HOW COULD YOU INSULT ME LIKE THIS!"

I have seen some similar moments:

Some guy: "I keep losing and losing and losing!"
Me: "Perhaps now it is the right moment to change your 'Mech, your 'Mech's loadout or to adjust your tactics."
Some guy: "Stop your T1 elitism! I know best how to play! Before the Tier reset I was in T1 too! I am not going to change anything!"

[Ihlrath]

pattonesque, on 27 January 2024 - 12:59 PM, said:

overcoming oneself is the first step to true enlightenment

Somebody's been diggin' through the fortune cookies again!

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MrMadguy, on 27 January 2024 - 10:45 PM, said:

"Everything is PVP games is about player power" - is the biggest misconception, created by 1% of top players. If all players would be thinking about their power only and would only min-maxing, then I wouldn't see so many Atlases in my matches, right? What is completely neglegated in such concepts - is player choices, that are important part of any game. As important, as player power.

So first, Atlases aren't as weak as you seem to think as a couple are even seen in comp.
Second, while yes player choice is important, you still have to be careful about making certain choices too powerful for the skill involved. If lock-ons functioned like MW4, yes they should be just as viable as direct fire because the skill necessary in that game was honestly more than lasers (holding the reticle for 1s+ on the mech itself and reticle placement mattered when missiles were fired did make them require more skill than point-n-click in that game).

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 28 January 2024 - 07:50 PM.

[pattonesque]

MrMadguy, on 27 January 2024 - 10:45 PM, said:

"Everything is PVP games is about player power" - is the biggest misconception, created by 1% of top players. If all players would be thinking about their power only and would only min-maxing, then I wouldn't see so many Atlases in my matches, right? What is completely neglegated in such concepts - is player choices, that are important part of any game. As important, as player power.

Atlases are actually pretty good these days, you don't know this because you don't understand the game on anything but a surface level

[MrMadguy]

pattonesque, on 28 January 2024 - 08:17 PM, said:

Atlases are actually pretty good these days, you don't know this because you don't understand the game on anything but a surface level

Yeah, yeah. Giant hitboxes, IS-XL-ST-one-shots and low wide hardpoints are great. You either hit ground via your weapons or you have to expose 50-70% of your 'Mech and get your STs blown instantly, because you're too slow to take cover.

Overall rules:
1) Old 'Mechs are junk due to power creep
2) IS 'Mechs are junk due to XL-ST-deaths
3) Assaults are junk, because they're slow easy targets
4) Clan 'Mechs are junk due to fixed equipment, that leaves little room for choice

And Atlas is 3/4. It's junk in cube.

The biggest secret, I have no reason to keep now. The best 'Mechs in this game - are IIC ones.

Edited by MrMadguy, 29 January 2024 - 03:36 AM.

[cougurt]

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

Yeah, yeah. Giant hitboxes, IS-XL-ST-one-shots and low wide hardpoints are great. You either hit ground via your weapons or you have to expose 50-70% of your 'Mech and get your STs blown instantly, because you're too slow to take cover.

Overall rules:
1) Old 'Mechs are junk due to power creep
2) IS 'Mechs are junk due to XL-ST-deaths
3) Assaults are junk, because they're slow easy targets
4) Clan 'Mechs are junk due to fixed equipment, that leaves little room for choice

And Atlas is 3/4. It's junk in cube.

The biggest secret, I have no reason to keep now. The best 'Mechs in this game - are IIC ones.

yeah, you've just proven that you have no idea what you're talking about.

[Curccu]

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

Yeah, yeah. Giant hitboxes, IS-XL-ST-one-shots and low wide hardpoints are great. You either hit ground via your weapons or you have to expose 50-70% of your 'Mech and get your STs blown instantly, because you're too slow to take cover.

Overall rules:
1) Old 'Mechs are junk due to power creep
2) IS 'Mechs are junk due to XL-ST-deaths
3) Assaults are junk, because they're slow easy targets
4) Clan 'Mechs are junk due to fixed equipment, that leaves little room for choice

And Atlas is 3/4. It's junk in cube.

The biggest secret, I have no reason to keep now. The best 'Mechs in this game - are IIC ones.

LOL Atlas is very strong mech and yeah don't run them with XL.
Pretty good hitbox, stupidly good arms for shielding
More extra quirk armor than fits into standard 20 ton mech.

Biggest secret really is that some IICs are stupidly strong and some are mediocre, there are more mediocre ones that strong ones.

[pbiggz]

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

Yeah, yeah. Giant hitboxes, IS-XL-ST-one-shots and low wide hardpoints are great. You either hit ground via your weapons or you have to expose 50-70% of your 'Mech and get your STs blown instantly, because you're too slow to take cover.

So you're Atlas-ing wrong.

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

Overall rules:

These aren't rules, they're confessions on your part.

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

1) Old 'Mechs are junk due to power creep

Not a universal rule. Some older mechs definitely need love, but some are solid.

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

2) IS 'Mechs are junk due to XL-ST-deaths

Again, not a universal rule. If you run an XL on a mech with bad hitboxes you'll probably have a bad time. If you run XLs on slow mechs, as I am sure you are doing given your post history, you'll have a bad time. Yes they are squishier. You're meant to evade fire with them, not complain because you cant tank.

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

3) Assaults are junk, because they're slow easy targets

Wrong.

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

4) Clan 'Mechs are junk due to fixed equipment, that leaves little room for choice

Comically wrong. By your standard everything sucks. This is manifestly a *you* problem. The common thread in all of this is you. You're doing something wrong but you're determined to make it not your fault.

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

And Atlas is 3/4. It's junk in cube.

Wrong.

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 02:53 AM, said:

The biggest secret, I have no reason to keep now. The best 'Mechs in this game - are IIC ones.

IIC mechs are pretty good, but clan omnis and a number of IS mechs are at or near the top of the food chain.

Again, to repeat, you've shared a laundry list of "rules". In reality, these are confessions; admissions of your own limitations. You're experiencing difficulties in the game because you're refusing to improve and every time you run into headwinds you try to blame something or someone; anyone but you.

You'll never get out if you don't start getting honest about what your problems actually are. Steadfast refusal to ever take responsibility does not look good on you.

[MrMadguy]

Curccu, on 29 January 2024 - 07:19 AM, said:

LOL Atlas is very strong mech and yeah don't run them with XL.
Pretty good hitbox, stupidly good arms for shielding
More extra quirk armor than fits into standard 20 ton mech.

Biggest secret really is that some IICs are stupidly strong and some are mediocre, there are more mediocre ones that strong ones.

Using STD engine on already gimped 'Mech => double-gimping it. I know everything I need to know. All my knowledge comes from hours of trial'n'erroring. I've tried many 'Mechs, many variants, many builds. I just don't feel comfortable, when playing 'Mech, that constantly hits ground when shotting from higher ground. It's just impossible to play such 'Mech on maps like Canyon Network.

[pbiggz]

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 09:14 AM, said:

Using STD engine on already gimped 'Mech => double-gimping it.

Wrong

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 09:14 AM, said:

I know everything I need to know.

No you don't. The fact that you think you do is the problem.

[MrMadguy]

It's not my limitation. It's 'Mech's limitation. And I don't want to be limited by 'Mech.

Again. Your argument is wrong. Because if everybody would care about power only and would be min-maxing - everybody would play Annihilators, Dire Wolves, Timber Wolves, Shadow Cats, Piranhas, etc. And players play different 'Mechs, including really bad ones.

[pbiggz]

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 09:21 AM, said:

It's not my limitation. It's 'Mech's limitation. And I don't want to be limited by 'Mech.

If that is what you think it means you are using a mech for the wrong purpose. You wouldnt use an atlas to skirmish. You wouldnt use a flea for an assault. There are different tools for different jobs and you seem to fundamentally not be understanding that. This is, in no uncertain terms, a user issue.

MrMadguy, on 29 January 2024 - 09:21 AM, said:

Again. Your argument is wrong. Because if everybody would care about power only and would be min-maxing - everybody would play Annihilators, Dire Wolves, Timber Wolves, Shadow Cats, Piranhas, etc. And players play different 'Mechs, including really bad ones.

This is irrelevant. The discussion at hand is now specifically your assertions that many mechs are bad, when reality seems to demonstrate that this is not the case, and it is in fact your decisions/habits and your refusal to consider changing them, that is impacting your gameplay.