111 replies to this topic

[BerryChunks]

jakucha, on 01 February 2013 - 10:15 PM, said:

Lacks a lot of content it will have when it's out of beta for a month or two, lacks balance changes and weapon changes that it will have by then as well, you're treating it as a complete game when it isn't yet op.

until they unnerf heat so that stock variants aren't total ****, until they cut armor back to 1/2 again so that weapon vs armor dynamic is how it should be, I'm not holding my breath.

[Raidyr]

CapperDeluxe, on 01 February 2013 - 09:45 PM, said:

only 2 usable mechs? damn I guess all this time KICKING BUTT with the cataphract, centurion, stalker, awesome, hunchback, and dragon were just some dream I had where unicorns shot out of my autocannon and leprechaun gold appeared where my PPCs struck!

Again, optimal. Not that I agree with OP but if you are going to retort you should atleast have a basic grasp on language and context before making the attempt.

Thirdstar, on 01 February 2013 - 10:03 PM, said:

The only thing I gleaned from this thread is that there are a LOT of MWO vets who have no understanding of metagame.

And that's actually quite surprising.

Hmm.

It will be eternally amusing to me that the people who paid $120 to beta test a game are the same people who don't understand basic math or statistics.

[BerryChunks]

I think MWO is dying, or was already dead, aka doa, due to failures at launch with direction.

[Suki]

Pugastrius, on 01 February 2013 - 03:40 PM, said:

So because you don't know you're hurting your team by using a less than optimal mech, there is variety?

For the record, I'm a solid pilot. Always at the top of the rankings even in my 4 & 8 man groups (to any of my group members reading this, I mean no disrespect).

For whar record? Really good solid pilot declaring there're only 2 good mechs? I' ******* BIG *** LOL!!!!
I can do really good things in all my stalkers, unreally good things in a ******* nerfed to the *** streak Cata, not talking about hunchback and fantastic using of all the centurions by my friend.

All I can say YOU are abig LOOSER sir with 2 left hands and Your 4-8 group will be better without You.
You're hurting Your team by just being in it.

Edited by Suki, 02 February 2013 - 12:02 AM.

[Suki]

BerryChunks, on 01 February 2013 - 11:48 PM, said:

I think MWO is dying, or was already dead, aka doa, due to failures at launch with direction.

If it's dying - get lost, we'll be better without You.

Edited by Suki, 02 February 2013 - 12:04 AM.

[MWHawke]

Raidyr, on 01 February 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

I'd argue that the clueless person here is the one incapable of defining either viable or optimal in the context of theorycrafting. Maybe if you keep parroting white noise ad hominem something will get through.


Random battles and 8v8 drops

Yes this is the fourth time you have said "clueless" without actually backing it up, simply that he is. Can you explain why he is wrong?

So now you are backpedaling. Now he has a clue, it's just that he is late to the party.



Okay, so the person you replied to has laid this out in three separate posts that were either too complex for you to understand, or you just outright ignored. I'll try to get this through to you myself, for all the good it will do

There is a difference between viable and optimal. OP is not stating that DDCs and 3Ls will win 100% of their engagements, just that they are more optimal for overall performance. The Raven 3L is the optimal light mech in the game currently but I've killed loads of them as the Jenner or Commando. Hell I've even killed a Raven as a Spider 5V, likely the worst mech currently in the game.

I'm glad you do well in your Atlas-D. You just should know that you would perform better in the DD-C, because ECM breaks balance and the DD-C has better hardpoints.


How so? Explain why the 3L and Atlas DDC are not the optimal mechs, atleast for their weight class, please.

LOL!!! I don't understand? What I understand is you are all looking at maths rather than skill. You want to crunch numbers, then say that that build should be all. That's utter bull. You look at simple technical maths but you don't even factor in pilot skill nor gunnery ability, ability to use terrain, familiarity with build and so many other factors.

And no, I would not perform better because of ECM on the DDC. I will perform better in the DDC because I LEARN TO PLAY in it. Even your own experience playing the game tells you as much. Stop looking at the game in terms of numbers. You mention I ignored the explanation but you ignored MY explanation that a person given a theoretically better weapon and not knowing how to use it, would still fail. The best weapon is the weapon that person knows how to use.

And if you could kill 3-5 Mechs in a game, then that is not an optimal build for you? I'm sorry but my logic is not able to compute that.

Don't go around casting aspersions at other people's intelligence when you are looking at only one side of the coin.

[Noth]

BerryChunks, on 01 February 2013 - 10:29 PM, said:

until they unnerf heat so that stock variants aren't total ****, until they cut armor back to 1/2 again so that weapon vs armor dynamic is how it should be, I'm not holding my breath.

They had the armor at standard levels and matches ended far far too quickly. You were lucky to have a 4 minute round with everyone fighting. AC20s are still scary to be hit by and rock you. The weapons just take more shots to downs omeone which is a good thing. I don't feel like I'm walking in a giant robot when I'm one shot by a single weapon. The heat system works well. You can make the trials work despite their higher heat. I have more issues with the lack of ammo on the trial than I do with their heat.

[CECILOFS]

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

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.

Firstly, lets not compare this game to WoW. I mean...really...jut don't.

Secondly, the difference was only ever a few percent of DPS. The problem was the herd and quite frankly ******** mentality of the community, which meant anyone who wasn't cookie cutter got ostracised and bullied for no real reason.

Quote

And while you can still bring a mage and win the raid, just like you can bring a stalker and win the match

Exactly, so its fine

Really the only part of the OP I agree with is that ECM is so powerful that having at least a few of the mentioned mechs on your team makes a big difference.

Oh and the OP forgot to complain about Streaks, pre-mades and Catapults, so bad job there

[CECILOFS]

MWHawke, on 02 February 2013 - 12:13 AM, said:

The best weapon is the weapon that person knows how to use.

So very true. Also the same for individual mechs. I suck with ACs because my aim/ping is terrible, but I can do well with missiles (yes even SRMs). I am pretty average in my K2, but deadly in my C1, which is considered inferior.

[Particle Man]

Alexii, on 01 February 2013 - 06:48 PM, said:

And this is unasked chest thumping.

i dont think that means what you think it means

[Wintersdark]

CECILOFS, on 02 February 2013 - 01:22 AM, said:

So very true. Also the same for individual mechs. I suck with ACs because my aim/ping is terrible, but I can do well with missiles (yes even SRMs). I am pretty average in my K2, but deadly in my C1, which is considered inferior.

This, and the similar posts make a very good point.

A mathematically superior chassis may not bring more to your team if, for whatever reason, you can't be as good in it as you can be in something else.

Work out what you will to determine what's mathematically superior, but the human variables are there and cannot be ignored. So a mathematically superior mech loadout is not necessarily the optimal one for the team.

This is where, as with very, very many things in life... What is better in theory is often not better in practice.

Simply put: Being in a theoretically superior mech doesn't always result in better performance for the team, and as such failing to pilot the theoretically "optimal" chassis/loadout is not necessarily disadvantaging your team.

Edited by Wintersdark, 02 February 2013 - 11:11 AM.

[Rannos]

Welcome to The Far Country! Enjoy your topic while it still seems to matter.

[Ter Ushaka]

Oh stop lying to them Rannos. Their topic never mattered.

All that matters now, is the POST.

[Agincourt]

Congratulations, publords, on yet another worthless thread.

[BerryChunks]

Suki, on 02 February 2013 - 12:04 AM, said:

If it's dying - get lost, we'll be better without You.

lol angry boy.

[Rannos]

BerryChunks, on 02 February 2013 - 10:34 PM, said:

lol angry boy.

YOU ARE THE WORST GOON! STAY OFF TOPIC, NEWBIRD SCUM!

[LaurenceMcFunk]

ok i give up i have nothing clever to post now or any time

[Ter Ushaka]

Questo è stato il più strano gioco Super Bowl che abbia mai visto, anche questo è un post.

[ChickenWing]

Is this a new post that we can not not post in? I'm excited.

[Grraarrgghh]

LaurenceMcFunk, on 03 February 2013 - 02:53 PM, said:

ok i give up i have nothing clever to post now or any time

You are a product of your environment.