111 replies to this topic

[Alexii]

MWHawke, on 01 February 2013 - 06:21 PM, said:

But there are so many things that can be used but he has not learned to use them. I'm not defending anybody but I would like to suggest that he learn to use what is on-hand.

Its not for me to say , but i have powerful doubts in this statement. I have a feeling that OP tried the options given to him and just found them wanting. Why i think that ? To an extent i agree with his statement =) ( Except Gauss =) Gauss rox =)) )

[MWHawke]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 01 February 2013 - 06:15 PM, said:

He's technically correct. I understand the replies saying "I kick *** in (Insert this here)", or whatever variation.

But I suspect many of you don't play MMO's. One of the key things in games such as this is the meta game. The meta game in Mechwarrior involves load-outs and ECM.

It's actually quite a bit like WoW's talent trees and classes. There was always one class with a specific talent tree that would be better at doing damage than every other class. That's not to say the other classes couldn't come and contribute, but that one class was always in higher demand and received preference in raiding.

So lets say the rogue using a backstab style build was the best in WoW. Well that would be the Atlas DC here. And while you can still bring a mage and win the raid, just like you can bring a stalker and win the match, you are still technically not playing the game at it's most optimal level.

Which is why a lot of the 8-mans see a lot of the same mechs/loadouts.

Well, I don't agree. I still get 3-5 kills using chassis and weapons that were not listed. I would suggest OP learns which weapon and chassis he is good at and plays those rather than just come here to complain about it. If he is bad at most of them, then that fact speaks for itself. Everyone has access to the same tools, he just needs to learn to use what is available.

Alexii, on 01 February 2013 - 06:30 PM, said:

Its not for me to say , but i have powerful doubts in this statement. I have a feeling that OP tried the options given to him and just found them wanting. Why i think that ? To an extent i agree with his statement =) ( Except Gauss =) Gauss rox =)) )

Everyone has access to the same weapons. If he found them wanting, then shouldn't he learn to use them than complain here?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

MWHawke, on 01 February 2013 - 06:31 PM, said:

Well, I don't agree. I still get 3-5 kills using chassis and weapons that were not listed. I would suggest OP learns which weapon and chassis he is good at and plays those rather than just come here to complain about it. If he is bad at most of them, then that fact speaks for itself. Everyone has access to the same tools, he just needs to learn to use what is available.

Sigh...it's not something you can agree or disagree with it. It's a fact, not an opinion.

If you crunch numbers in these games, there is always a "best".

I don't care about skill. I was a hunter in WoW, we weren't the best DPS class, but i was VERY good at the game. So they brought me. But would I have helped more as a rogue? Yup. But it's a decision we make.

The fact is though, some weapons, some mechs, some equipment is the "BEST" <insert category here>. You cannot disagree with that, it's a fact. If you make a choice not to use them, you are artificially limiting yourself. Which is fine, you can make that decision.

But it doesn't make his post any less accurate.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 01 February 2013 - 06:36 PM.

[Mazzyplz]

Deamhan, on 01 February 2013 - 03:56 PM, said:

Actually the weapons are...

Gauss
AC20
SRM6
PPC (ER preferred)

Why?

Because this game favors burst over sustained.

what do you expect? if you sustain your fire you're exposing your mech's face to a big fist.
and what, no AC5?
large laser is not that good, but you're wrong about the ER PPC, only the minority use it because of how hot it runs

[Alexii]

MWHawke, on 01 February 2013 - 06:32 PM, said:

Everyone has access to the same weapons. If he found them wanting, then shouldn't he learn to use them than complain here?

U misunderstand him IMO. Why should he train to try and increase the efficiency with a certain weapon , when there is already another platform that preforms all the other one can AND more.

[MWHawke]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 01 February 2013 - 06:35 PM, said:

Sigh...it's not something you can agree or disagree with it. It's a fact, not an opinion.

If you crunch numbers in these games, there is always a "best".

I don't care about skill. I was a hunter in WoW, we weren't the best DPS class, but i was VERY good at the game. So they brought me. But would I have helped more as a rogue? Yup. But it's a decision we make.

The fact is though, some weapons, some mechs, some equipment is the "BEST" <insert category here>. You cannot disagree with that, it's a fact. If you make a choice not to use them, you are artificially limiting yourself. Which is fine, you can make that decision.

But it doesn't make his post any less accurate.

Totally disagree. The best weapons are the ones YOU learn to use best. It is NOT a FACT that certain weapons are better. Let me give you facts.

You would think that normally, a machinegun would be better than a pistol right? Full auto, 30 bullets mayhem. But, if you did not know how to properly grip that weapon, then the pistol would be better no?

Alexii, on 01 February 2013 - 06:39 PM, said:

U misunderstand him IMO. Why should he train to try and increase the efficiency with a certain weapon , when there is already another platform that preforms all the other one can AND more.

This already counters all his arguments. He won't learn to play because he feels that the other platform can outperform all others.

[Alexii]

MWHawke, on 01 February 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

Totally disagree. The best weapons are the ones YOU learn to use best. It is NOT a FACT that certain weapons are better. Let me give you facts.

You would think that normally, a machinegun would be better than a pistol right? Full auto, 30 bullets mayhem. But, if you did not know how to properly grip that weapon, then the pistol would be better no?

Depends on what the end game is. If the end game is making a lot of noise then No. Even if u cant grip it properly the MG will make more noise then pistol.

Dude... I give up.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

MWHawke, on 01 February 2013 - 06:41 PM, said:

Totally disagree. The best weapons are the ones YOU learn to use best. It is NOT a FACT that certain weapons are better. Let me give you facts.

You would think that normally, a machinegun would be better than a pistol right? Full auto, 30 bullets mayhem. But, if you did not know how to properly grip that weapon, then the pistol would be better no?

That's not what we're talking about in this situation. I get what you are saying. But this isn't RL. It's a video game. The skill-set doesn't vary as much as it does in the real world.

Also, I think if you were to ask a marine who was equally trained in a pistol and a machine gun. He'd pick a machine gun for an all out brawl.

Really what we are talking about is the fact that when you really break games like this down, it's all numbers and math.

And there is always a mathematically best way to do things.

Once again there is nothing to disagree with in my post. What you are doing is playing what "feels" better. Which is fine, but you can't compare feelings, everyone has different feelings.

[Particle Man]

Pugastrius, on 01 February 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

So I’ve posted quite a bit, so I thought I would fill in the developers why I’ve decided (at least temporarily) to put MWO on the back burner.

you're telling the forums, not the devs. if you wanted to tell the devs you would send this in an email to support@mwomercs.com. This is just a cry for attention.

[Spike Brave]

I saw some posts regarding the best load out and meta gaming. I think that it's also fair to say a lot of performance depends on play style. People will perform better with weapons and Mechs that fit their play style no matter what the math says. If you tailor your mech to fit your play style you can be successful.

The example of WoW came up. I used to play that until I couldn't take the "you're not doing it right" comments because I didn't follow the best build. I was quite good and the only problem was the fact I didn't build like I was "suppose to." What best is a matter of opinion and what works for you.

I'd also like to point out that helping your team doesn't always mean most damage or highest kills. The game includes role based warfare. I use light Mechs to scout. I tell my teammates where targets are. I spot for LRMs. I touch the enemy base to make them break formation. These kind of things may not be reflected in rewards or stats, but they are helpful. Teamwork matters.

I'm sorry to hear that he only likes two Mechs. They must fit his play style. I have fun in my Commando. Good luck with your next game.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Particle Man, on 01 February 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

you're telling the forums, not the devs. if you wanted to tell the devs you would send this in an email to support@mwomercs.com. This is just a cry for attention.

While I don't think this is the best way to get attention, with this being a beta, there should be a few people on the team that only read the forums and report back to the devs. If that's not happening, it's another problem with the group developing.

[Alexii]

Particle Man, on 01 February 2013 - 06:46 PM, said:

you're telling the forums, not the devs. if you wanted to tell the devs you would send this in an email to support@mwomercs.com. This is just a cry for attention.

And this is unasked chest thumping.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Spike Brave, on 01 February 2013 - 06:47 PM, said:

I saw some posts regarding the best load out and meta gaming. I think that it's also fair to say a lot of performance depends on play style. People will perform better with weapons and Mechs that fit their play style no matter what the math says. If you tailor your mech to fit your play style you can be successful.

The example of WoW came up. I used to play that until I couldn't take the "you're not doing it right" comments because I didn't follow the best build. I was quite good and the only problem was the fact I didn't build like I was "suppose to." What best is a matter of opinion and what works for you.

I'd also like to point out that helping your team doesn't always mean most damage or highest kills. The game includes role based warfare. I use light Mechs to scout. I tell my teammates where targets are. I spot for LRMs. I touch the enemy base to make them break formation. These kind of things may not be reflected in rewards or stats, but they are helpful. Teamwork matters.

I'm sorry to hear that he only likes two Mechs. They must fit his play style. I have fun in my Commando. Good luck with your next game.

Once again, I was like you. I played what I enjoyed. But you cannot really deny that there is a "best" in these games. If you choose not to do it, that's up to you.

Ignoring that is fine, but you cannot say someone is wrong if they say that mathematically there are "best" weapons, mechs and equipment. It's true.

[Wintersdark]

Pugastrius, on 01 February 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

You generally shouldn't be dying to Gauss cats with as much ground clutter that exists on every map.

A Gausscat with 4 ML's played as a medium range brawler absolutely can rock the leaderboard. Gauss has no minimum range, and while they'll blow up if sneezed on, the side torsos on the CTP are fairly hard to hit. I know when I'm running mine, losing the Gauss is never an issue.

Quote

As for the LL boats: As I mentioned in my OP equipping more than 2 LLs usually eats up more weight than the extra damage justifies. You will certainly do more damage over the course the battle by dropping down to 2 and increasing your heat capacity.

Maybe more damage over the course of a battle, but not necessarily better. A Flame rocking 4 Large Lasers bursts harder, and as you noted in your OP burst is favored in this game. Hit 3-4 times, fall back to cool down, come back. You don't expose yourself as long to get the same damage done.

Quote

UACs provide the best of a lot of worlds, massive range, extremely high burst, and solid consistent damage.

The UAC is inarguably better, if you can work out a macro or some such to enable continuous non-doubleshot fire.

Quote

Every mech is better served having DHS. Every... one...

Unfortunately. DHS is essentially a mandatory upgrade for every mech. The 10 internal 2x doubles do it, really. You need to fill 10 slots with SHS just to make up for that.

Ok, for reference (and yes, I'm agreeing with the OP here), DHS and SHS are equal in terms of overall heat dissipation per slot once you've added 18 heat sinks over the 10 in-engine sinks (so 28 sinks). That's assuming you're running a 270 or smaller engine with no "extra slots" - those push the calculations even further in favor of DHS. If you run a smaller engine than 250, it'll take slightly fewer extra sinks to reach parity, but if you're running that small an engine you're either in a light (which doesn't need those sorts of numbers of sinks) or you're running a massive mech that's going to move so damn slowly it's not worth considering.

Quote

You're confusing being a skilled pilot and mech strength.
Can a non-optimal mech still do well? Absolutely. Does that mean it's not a sub-optimal mech? No.

You'll notice that I chose my words very carefully when commenting on mechs and weapons. I didn't say that you can't get kills or that you're destined to lose. I said your team would be better off if you piloted a different mech. By using something else, you're handicapping yourself.

Now, here's where I disagree with you most strongly.

ECM simply isn't so significant anymore, it just doesn't have enough impact to make the 3L and D-DC the absolute best mech choices. TAG penetrates readily, you can target mechs just fine once your close regardless. Lock on up close is meaningless.

And Streaks are only an optimal weapon choice (wherein ECM is an important defense) if you're a terrible shot or suffer from terribad lagshields. Personally, I have no trouble hitting lights at all, so taking Streaks is gimping me.

ECM's only significant impact, then, is stealth. That's not to be ignored - information warfare here is important! But it's hardly an I-WIN button. People can still see you, and still readily fire on you.

I could concede the Atlas D-DC's superiority only in 8-man premades, where there is no weight class balancing, and that's a flaw of a ridiculous matchmaker system wherein tonnage is not just mostly ignored but instead completely ignored. Comparing an 800 ton drop battling a 400 ton drop is grossly unfair.

Outside of the broken 8-man system - which is broken for reasons that have nothing to do with mech balance - this ridiculous "optimal mech" thing is silly.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

And by the way I only play Centurions, I know I hurt my team, but it's what I like.

I do have a Raven 3L, and once I learned to pilot it, I realized how much more helpful I was during games. But it's just not me.

[Alexii]

Spike but who would u say is a better scout. A spider with no ECM or the Raven with ?

[Wintersdark]

As for the mathematically better part...

There ARE mathematically superior weapons. Inarguably. There are very good weapons, average weapons, and simply poor weapons; some varying depending on intended use - but it's not particularly difficult to calculate.

The OP's list (barring the missing Gauss) is pretty accurate there.

However, it's FAR more difficult to identify better mech chassis, and this is where I bring the most issue with the OP. ECM just isn't that big a deciding factor anymore, and will be even less so with the upcoming changes. There are simply too many variables, and different (but perfectly valid) playstyles. Different players will have different skill sets - some with be better shots, some better with faster mechs, etc. There ARE definitely better and worse chassis overall, of course, but there is a lot of flexibility in there.

[ParasiteX]

Pugastrius, on 01 February 2013 - 04:22 PM, said:

No, it's terrible, just terrible. Can it improve the extremely light mechs? Maybe... but it needs to be completely overhauled to make it more useful to a wide swath of mechs.

You're confusing being a skilled pilot and mech strength.
Can a non-optimal mech still do well? Absolutely. Does that mean it's not a sub-optimal mech? No.

Ever heard of the Hunchback, Centurion, Dragon. etc... I perform just as well with all of those as i do my easy mode Raven.

In-fact it's even easier to down ravens now with the last patch. If anything i feel bored when piloting the raven as i dont have to aim as much thanks to how streaks are atm.
So bored in fact that i replaced one of the streaks with a srm6. Which gives it a even nastier punch now.

But i do just as well in my Dragon, and i don't use any cheezy 4LL builds or **** like that. I use all the hardpoints efficiently, including ballistics, i prefer UAC5, but perform just as well with an AC10 or LB10-X. And it works out just fine. And i often top the charts. Even with your mythical ultra-powerful Atlas DDC and Raven 3L in the enemy team.

Besides. Atlas DDC are gonna be useless in the Feb 19 patch. As PPCs will now knock out it's ECM. Ravens will still be tricky to hit with PPCs. Unless you know how to aim. And the last patch has made that considerably easier now.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

I'm glad we agree on the weapons. But I disagree about ECM. With a per tonnage, per slot basis, it's the best piece of equipment in the game.

It's the only piece of equipment that can invalidate multiple weapon types if used properly.

And while I appreciate the skill argument, I really subscribe to the fact that given enough time someone can be equally good with every mech in the game. This differences just aren't that large. There is no "physical" difference, as there would be in real life.

I really wish people would stop bringing in their personal feelings on which mech they love to pilot, blah blah, etc etc.

That is not what the OP is talking about.

[Zero Neutral]

Pugastrius, on 01 February 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

So I’ve posted quite a bit, so I thought I would fill in the developers why I’ve decided (at least temporarily) to put MWO on the back burner.

Mech Variety: In the current state of the game, there are very few legitimate mechs that can be played without feeling like you’re gimping your team. Here is the short list:

Two mechs… that’s it. If you’re using anything other than these two mechs you’re probably hurting your team more than you’re helping them. In my opinion PGI really needs to stop introducing more mechs and make sure every mech they have introduced is actually useful.

Weapon Variety: Even after implementing the upcoming changes there are still very few useful weapons. Here’s the short list:

3 Weapons (and a 4^th if you count fillers) That’s it… If you have a different weapon on your mech, you’re hurting your potential.

Upgrades:


Modules: They are absolutely terrible. Everyone of them. Considering it takes absolutely forever to build up the GXP to get them, this really does need to be said.

Map Variety: I don’t really mind playing the same map over and over, but I’m probably the minority. The problem really comes in that it doesn’t matter which map you’re on, or what the goal of the map is (assault or conquest), it is going to devolve into a close-quarters brawl. Every time, without fail.

PuGs and Premades: I regularly play both sides of this line and the fact of the matter is, PGI needs to match pre-made sizes. If one team has a premade of 4, then the other team gets a group of 4. It’s as simple as that.

The ELO system isn’t going to fix it, unless PGI is going store two ELOs (one for solo queuing and one for group queuing). All it’s going to do is force people to only do one or the other.

MC Prices: Because I got several months of enjoyment from the game (and I’m a fan of the franchise) I donated my $50, but that’s all I’ll ever give. Why do I say donated? Because the prices are on everything else are just too high… way too high across the board.

I’m sure there is a lot more that I just forgot about, but this is more than enough for them to work on.

I honestly despise people who can come up with this sort of insane post and take themselves seriously.

Cognitive dissonance... it is pretty prevalent here. Your opinion is made up just move on.

You think that only two mechs are viable... that statement alone renders all of your hope for any kind of serious acknowledgement null and void.

You also use the hare brained terms like, "This isn't going to fix that..." and "All it's going to do is..." and "It's as simple as..." and "Every time... without fail..." You have literally no idea what you are talking about yet assert certainties, imo.

Edited by Zero Neutral, 01 February 2013 - 07:27 PM.