86 replies to this topic

[Dreadp1r4te]

GioAvanti, on 08 December 2012 - 06:46 PM, said:

I've beaten teams like that.....using a pug on team speak no less.

Honestly from what I've heard your unit is a lot more talk than skill. You've also trashed people I've grouped with so my opinion of this thread is just that your egos can't take a loss so you're asking for nerfs.

And honestly your replies indicate to me that you are one of the players with poor taste who wish to turn this into yet another MMO built around min/maxing and completely disregarding everything Battletech is about just you can get a free win and a high stat sheet. Do yourself a favor and find another thread to troll contribute in.

[Sillymicrobe]

I simply believe that making critical harpoints would stop plenty of the bickering on this topic. There was critical harpoints on mechwarrior 4, and it worked good. Anyone here who seems to think that a catapult should be able to load up some AC/20s where there were previously machine-guns has some issues in my opinion. What's the point of giving the Atlas this big ol cannon on it's torso when a catapult can shoot the same stuff from a machine-gun barrel? It's silly in my opinion, and it lessens the effectiveness of this game's role based warfare. If you think critical hsrdpoints will hinder your ability to customize your mech, well guess what, it will. Get over it. Fact of the matter: the inner sphere doesn't have a whole lot to choose from at the moment. We are practically in the dark age of battletech. When the clans come around it will be a whole new world of toys. Bottom line: I wouldn't get too used to these 'cheese' builds.

[Corvus Antaka]

Yup. This is why many of us have been asking for a stock mech gamemode for the past 5 months.

Because we know, after playing mechwarrior for 20 + years, what happens with open class mech combat.

[Belkor]

Codejack, on 08 December 2012 - 05:39 AM, said:

They want it to be a close quarters run-and-gun game instead of a deliberate tactical one. Ultimately, I don't think that your usual FPS is their precise motivation, but in trying to bias the game towards their style of gameplay, that's how it is going to end up.

And we can all agree that streaks with its point in general direction of enemy, lock and click - are the farthest thing from tactical right?

[anonymous175]

Fire at all the things. *****. ***. *******.

[CocoaJin]

I'd love to see matches with resource penalties, so certain gear, chassis, etc will require your team to take a hit some place else...like fewer players on your team or forcing some players to be reserves with queued spawning, less tonnage that can be dropped in the match, etc, etc.

I'd love to to see some concept of resource and logistical restraints on a match, where you have to make choices...not just pile all the riches of heaven into each battle because their are little to no consequences.

[Cerlin]

In regard to the OP's Points, I understand his frustration. I actually rolled in several matches with his unit (I am unaffiliated) and it is fun to see a unit using mixed tactics pulling out a win against higher weight mechs. I am a heavy pilot who tries hard not to use his atlas. However, this is essentially a sub optimal build for your team. Until there are weight and or battle value limits, this is how it will be. I like this myself for the challenge, this is the area where skill and teamwork can make the win happen. I have played many other MMO's where there is a clear "win" build but you can beat it with creativity, and I am sure that is still possible here.

Along with this, many respondents have mentioned min maxing in hardcore competitive pvp and I agree this is prevalent. One big issue I find is that these weapons were designed with different ideas in mind. For example, a tabletop campaign the ammo loadout of your mechs makes ammo reliant mechs a liability, where heat weapons are better for the longer term but in short burst engagements are worse. This is much less relevant when the match only lasts 10-15 minutes. This will change what is a "good" build in battletech and MWO. I accept this, but I will also stick with mechs I enjoy most.

The biggest X factor in this game are your teamwork skill, team tactics, and your personal skill. These factors can make ANY build viable. Some games do not calculate personal skill well but this game gives players a wide range to work with. I find that the overcoming of any "cheese" will be better players going in under ton for the challenge.

I am not judging either side, but I do fall a little bit more on the "fun" side. However this has not prevented me from getting a Raven-3L: or commando 2-d. If my team needs something and its not "fun" for me I will do it too win. Sometimes the best team work requires a bit of sacrifice.

Also, I hope they introduce "stock" gamemodes and "limited weight" drops as well. I have hope in PGI and will keep putting my money into this experiment.