351 replies to this topic

[Raso]

van Uber, on 21 February 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

Not letting people choose Mech after map promotes diverse builds. Either you go versatile or you specialize and adapt to your surroundings. The instant I dropped on the new map with my brawler Atlas, a complete new gameplay opend up. I enjoyed that.

A more diverse gameplay means less FTW builds and I would also appreciate that.

Jay35 said everything I already would have to counter this argument. Go up and read his post. You're wrong, pure and simple. Eventually you'll start seeing 2 or 3, generic builds that excel at nothing but excelling at nothing which work kinda well enough on ever single, diverse map in rotation.

[jay35]

van Uber, on 21 February 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

Not letting people choose Mech after map promotes diverse builds.

No it doesn't! That's patently false.
It reduces the number of builds that are safe enough to work on a wide variety of terrain and climates, which results in a reduced diversity of builds that are actually fielded. This is boring and generic gameplay rather than enhancing it.

[Xenosphobatic]

I've run a Splatcat on Alpine multiple times, and won decisively. I did this by staying close to a long range buddy, and when he needed his back scratcher scratched, I took care of it.

Builds work when you know how to use them. Adapt or die.

[Mackensen]

jay35, on 21 February 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

No it doesn't! That's patently false.
It reduces the number of builds that are safe enough to work on a wide variety of terrain and climates, which results in a reduced diversity of builds that are actually fielded. This is boring and generic gameplay rather than enhancing it.

I agree 100%. We will have a plain field of boring generalists bad at everything. The specialist are doomed and the mechlab will be obsolete.

[Noth]

jay35, on 21 February 2013 - 08:52 AM, said:

I do not understand why this conflation of issues is so popular and accepted. Boating is an entirely different issue and random maps is not the solution to boating, if it even needs a solution (arguably it doesn't, because there are natural counters to every type of boat and they work on any map).

The issue here is that random map dropping is abnormal and unfriendly for multiplayer team-oriented gameplay.

As maps increase in diversity of terrain, size, and climate, teams are increasingly unable to properly prepare for the map by taking appropriate mechs, loadouts and camo for the environment in which they will be fighting.

That's the number one issue with random maps: A negative impact on strategy and teamwork, as well as reduced enjoyment for the players.

The other issue, which hasn't been identified yet because most people are short-sighted, is that having random drops on a wide diversity of environments actually REDUCES the number of viable mech builds because it automatically limits the range of viable builds that can perform with any consistency across all maps, forcing the player to take the same mech into every map out of fear of getting a map where their build won't work. The further the extremes in climates and terrain, the fewer builds retain effectiveness and the more generic and similar builds become, until every match starts to look nearly identical because only a handful of builds are worthwhile to take when you don't know ahead of time which map you'll be dropping into.

You're actually trading one type of uniformity for another. The thing is, the issue of boating can be countered naturally in the game. The uniformity of generic build "omni-use" mechs, however, cannot be countered because they are simply the only builds that work well across all maps. Instead of excelling on certain maps, they'll just be slightly more effective across all maps on average. How utterly boring!

And a third factor is that random drops without, at a bare minimum, the ability to exclude certain maps from the rotation, results in reduced player satisfaction and a shorter time to burnout on the game because there are some maps players simply hate and do not want to play on.

All of this is resolved by having a proper lobby match creation interface and ditching the console-legacy random matchmaking nonsense that has no place in a proper PC multiplayer game experience.

I agree with you underlined parts, but disagree with how to solve it. All getting rid of the matchmaker will do is lead to de_dust syndrome.

It would be better for them to actually create more balanced maps instead of maps that are such extremes. For example, throwing some more cover into Alpine would immediately make it easier on brawlers while not make it a brawler map because of teh sheer size and elevation differences. The other maps could have their size increased and the increase in size would actually decrease the viability of the brawlers some what.

Right now, currently I find myself running my long range mechs that don't suffer on the other maps simply because they are quite effective on other maps and super effective on Alpine.

Edited by Noth, 21 February 2013 - 09:29 AM.

[Hanz Blitzer]

In my first match on Alpine, I was in my Hunchback 4sp, and I was using the prime build. I could not shoot it out with snipers and missile boats, so I hung back until the groups could engage at shorter ranges. I ended the match with 3 kills and 2 assists. While snipers have an advantage, smart piloting can help to offset this. Short range specialized builds are viable on this map. Make yourself less of a target, and take the opportunities that present themselves.

[KingCobra]

Raso, on 21 February 2013 - 08:43 AM, said:

So explain to me how having a mech which is specilized for several maps is not adaptation? You're saying there is no Alldayeverydaymech but it sounds like you're actually saying that you should make a mech that's omnirole so you don't have to worry about the map being a poor map.... or an Alldayeverydaymech (except it would under-preform of almost every map and at almost every range). There are few mechs that have such flexibility and even then few builds per each of those mechs.

People gravitate towards FTW builds, it's the sad, sad nature of online gaming. People want one mech to rule them all, and all the better if all of the research and tweaking for said build was done on someone else's K/D spread. If we have to choose between these maps that range in 2 extremes, between brawler dominated maps vs the newer long range dominated maps than what do you think most gamers will do? Do you think we'll see more verity in builds and people playing the mechs they like or do you think we'll see people playing the same 4 or 5 builds like we did when ECM came out? The ability to select what mech you want to use when you know where you're dropping could help to alleviate some of that mentality and open up more specialized builds. Otherwise you can expect to see a new wave of under preforming, FTW, omnirole builds.

This is not a true statment i cant tell you how deverse the build really become when you have the option to save and test builds on different maps.Right now it is in fact more static as far as builds go you have one build for 3 maps when in fact a true mechwarrior builder might have hundreds of builds for all maps.That was part of the fun of past Mechwarrior PC games the ability to build configs and test them in actual battles most fail horrable and you must keep improvising and revising your builds.Plus when i played leagues i would not use the same builds all the time thats boring So only a small percentage would use the same builds over and over every map.

Edited by KingCobra, 21 February 2013 - 09:32 AM.

[AvatarofWhat]

Its not too hard to use a short range build in this map as long as you go 65+. It does however involve a ton of hanging back, maneuvering, and teamwork so that your team can get into just the right position to move in and brawl. Which can be a bit boring quite honestly, sitting back for 10 minutes while long range mechs trade shots just so you can move in and fight for one minute. Still doable. What surprises me is that people seem to think its all ok if you put a ppc or er large in your mech... Your still not going to have a good time trading fire with someone who carries all long range weapons. e.g. 4 ppc stalker only needs to hit you once for every time you hit him.

My problem is not that short range weapons suck but that since ppcs were buffed a lot of people were already taking range builds and assault mode was a stalemate more then ever. If you like to brawl you basically have to spend most of your game time waiting for just the right time and getting just the right positioning...which is kinda boring. and then you better hope your team is backing you up because gauss rifles and er ppcs are just as deadly close up. Don't get me wrong I'm all for giving splatcats a hard time, damn things are fast enough as it is anyway but we don't want brawling to become undoable or doable but to get it right you have to be bored for the first 10 minutes of every match. Biggest problem is probably the assault game mode, in this map. Conquest is a lot of fun no matter what you drive, coz you can go from one fight to the next, and approaching the enemy doesnt always mean getting completely destroyed by the entire enemy team before you get in range, unless they all stick together in which case you are hopefully capping bases.

Sorry I went all over the place with this argument but I think the main point I want to get across is that for this map Conquest is fun but Assault usually ends either with a base cap and no fighting or is a huge stalemate with long range builds trading shots. This was a problem in previous maps but it is really exacerbated in this map because it is so huge.

[Max Liao]

Raso, on 21 February 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

So you're saying all of the Mech Warrior video games, up until now, where you can customize your mechs and select what you want to drop with have been nothing but lies? Of that even TT, where you can customize your mechs and have several builds because is all just some sort of... what? Propaganda put out by canon haters to distract us from what all the canon in the books teach us?

I don't even think Mech 1 had customization, maybe it did, I forget. As for Mech 2 it was a Clan game, with Omni Mechs. Mechs 3 and 4 (like 1 and 2) were single player games where you are the hero. Heroes get the clout and/or C-Bills to customize.

And the computer games have never really been considered canon.

Just because the books gave rules for customization does not mean that it was common place. The rules were put in so you could customize for home brew games, yes. The House variants were either rare specialties of a particular unit, created at a factory - where no mere MechWarrior could just change things around at a whim, or jury rigging with serious flaws.

Raso, on 21 February 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

There is already precedent that the Mech Warrior games place certain standards of game design over certain ideas of canon. I mean why would you note how customizable a mech is only to not let someone customize it because only, like, 40 pilots at any one given time have the money to actually afford to do something like that?

Yes, I would prevent customization and make people use stock 'Mechs. ANYONE can design a better 'Mech than provided in the TROs, skill comes from piloting the canon 'Mechs, with all of their strengths and weaknesses, to victory. No one impresses me when they play a boat, including the one boat I use on occasion.

Raso, on 21 February 2013 - 08:56 AM, said:

Because it's true to the books or the lore? Lets go further. Lets make it so you don't actually own a mech but your mech is loaned to you by a house on a per mission basis and you get little, if any, say in which mech you are given. I mean it's not too far from canon, as I grasp it. Would it be fun? Who cares! It's canon that means it's intrinsically better!

Absolutely! Not only would I do this, I would have FUN with this. Let ELO, # of overall matches, or win/loss determine when/if you get a potential promotion to another 'Mech chassis.

Not fun for you? I'm sorry that you don't get what you want when you want it. How about earn it through longevity and/or success on the battlefield.

So, while you probably thought your examples would change my mind, I'm telling you that from the very beginning it is what I have been asking for,

[van Uber]

jay35, on 21 February 2013 - 09:05 AM, said:

No it doesn't! That's patently false.
It reduces the number of builds that are safe enough to work on a wide variety of terrain and climates, which results in a reduced diversity of builds that are actually fielded. This is boring and generic gameplay rather than enhancing it.

Yes it does!

If you get to choose Mechs adapted to maps, what kind of builds do you expect to see on a map like Alpine? It would not be a far stretch of the imagination to say a sudden increase in LRM and ER PPC as opposed what you see today. So that would be less diverse compared to the current situation where we see all kinds of builds. Or are you really of another opinion here?

If I always get to choose the FOTM build best adapted to the upcoming match, why would that provide more diversity?

[Felicitatem Parco]

This conversation has a slight problem, the OP accidentally/purposefully left the word "only" out of the Topic Title (it should have read: "Thx To New Map I Can't Carry Only Short Range Weapons"). And, even then, as stated by those in the thread, yes you can run only short-ranged weapons. However, the thread is now talking about Canon, choosing maps ahead of drop, Mechlabs, and other stuff.

This thread is being moved to the Jettisoned Communications, since it is still MW:O related, but it's not being moved to the kaetetoa because it hasn't totally devolved into a Flame War/Bashing thread.

[jay35]

Noth, on 21 February 2013 - 09:17 AM, said:

I agree with you underlined parts, but disagree with how to solve it. All getting rid of the matchmaker will do is lead to de_dust syndrome.

It would be better for them to actually create more balanced maps instead of maps that are such extremes. For example, throwing some more cover into Alpine would immediately make it easier on brawlers while not make it a brawler map because of teh sheer size and elevation differences. The other maps could have their size increased and the increase in size would actually decrease the viability of the brawlers some what.

Right now, currently I find myself running my long range mechs that don't suffer on the other maps simply because they are quite effective on other maps and super effective on Alpine.

The diversity in climates and terrain is a cornerstone of MechWarrior games. It drives the need for diversity in builds, thoughtful pre-planning strategy, and puts a use to heat management and camo types, all of which this game with its random drops is currently contradicting.

Random drops is Easy Mode for lazy people who can't be bothered to figure out how to build appropriately for each environment and just want one "safe" build so they can mindlessly click Launch without any thought involved.

[van Uber]

Raso, on 21 February 2013 - 09:03 AM, said:

Jay35 said everything I already would have to counter this argument. Go up and read his post. You're wrong, pure and simple. Eventually you'll start seeing 2 or 3, generic builds that excel at nothing but excelling at nothing which work kinda well enough on ever single, diverse map in rotation.

Well, he's wrong. I know, since I read his post. If people start building the same 2 or 3 generic builds the would be thoroughly spanked by players that choose to specialize and adapt to their surroundings. Eventually the player that choose to consistently play brawler end up in a town against generic number one and have a significant advantage. Just as said player could end up with a disadvantage if he's not adapting play style according to the environment.

[C4RNAGE]

Alpine map.

so i like 2 write a comment about the range of weapons but every one here did already

Than i say this map is for bigger battles even the 12v12 is to small number, and got very big high hills some how is hard to find enemy, and i expected like many hills in variation of sizes and is only few of them
i feel 2 big difference from rest of maps maybe,
but we will see it in future.

i feel this not gone be good map sadly.

[Mackensen]

Obviously some people are just not interested in "The Mechlab" part of this game. They only want static mechs that you can´t change. They get annoyed and offended if they are beaten by people who do their homework before the drop on the map. Maybe the solution is to give these people their own playarea where they don´t have to care about the more technical aspects of the game. They can have their place of mindless enjoyment.

[Steinar Bergstol]

Obviously some people are just not interested in the lore of the Battletech universe. They only want their FOTM cheesemechs they can customize at the drop of a hat. They get annoyed and offended of they can't have the optimal build at all times and are beaten by someone with a flexible loadout able to adapt and overcome. Maybe the solution is to give these people their own playarea where they don't have to care about the tactics and limitations of the Battletech universe. They can have their place of mindless munchkin enjoyment.

See how easy it is to insult someone else's preferred playstyle, even yours Mackensen? Please don't do it. It's not clever and it does not make your preferred style of play "the one true way" any more than it does the preferred style of those of us who disagree with you.

Edited by Steinar Bergstol, 21 February 2013 - 10:35 AM.

[jay35]

van Uber, on 21 February 2013 - 09:47 AM, said:

Well, he's wrong. I know, since I read his post. If people start building the same 2 or 3 generic builds the would be thoroughly spanked by players that choose to specialize and adapt to their surroundings.

Except you can't, because with things as they are you don't know what your surroundings will be until after you drop!
With random drops, you can't even choose an appropriate camo, rendering those utterly useless as anything more than mere cosmetics -i.e., doll painting. Again, fine for lazy people who aren't interested in tactics or strategy, but not befitting the MechWarrior game lineage.

Unless what you call tactics and specialization equates to taking a particular build into a crapshoot of about a 1-in-12 chance of landing on the map you've actually set it up for...? So you're not really talking about tactics or specialization, and any claim to this mess fostering adaptation in a player is essentially rendered moot because it's going about it backwards. The random drops scenario goes against a core concept of game design, namely, that players shouldn't be routinely forced into situations where the majority of the time they're prevented from using the most appropriate tool for the job, particularly when they've been granted the ability to create said tool. Here, have a mechlab where you can outfit mechs that are appropriate for each environment, but wait, we'll prevent you from being able to select the right one for each mission. No matter how you want to color it, that's a fundamental failure in game design, and it's proven by the way it results in a negation of, or reduction in, the functional purpose of certain content and mechanics within the game.

Edited by jay35, 21 February 2013 - 10:49 AM.

[Mackensen]

Steinar Bergstol, on 21 February 2013 - 10:35 AM, said:

Obviously some people are just not interested in the lore of the Battletech universe. They only want their FOTM cheesemechs they can customize at the drop of a hat. They get annoyed and offended of they can't have the optimal build at all times and are beaten by someone with a flexible loadout able to adapt and overcome. Maybe the solution is to give these people their own playarea where they don't have to care about the tactics and limitations of the Battletech universe. They can have their place of mindless munchkin enjoyment.

See how easy it is to insult someone else's preferred playstyle, even yours Mackensen? Please don't do it. It's not clever and it does not make your preferred style of play "the one true way" any more than it does the preferred style of those of us who disagree with you.

Well, it has been suggested in another thread to introduce a play "mode" with static mechs. I was against it because I thougth that it would split the community to much. But now I have changed my mind. It is probably best to introduce a new play mode with uncustomizable mechs droppning at random maps and a standard mode with customizable mechs and ability to match mech to environment. The differences are too big between these two types of players.

[HammerForge]

Have played Alpine once, beautiful map, to all those who say there is no way to hid from LRMs, well, I did it fine in a Raven 2X spotting for my team, so I have the experience to say, nope, hid many places. I did over 250 damage with medium lasers and an SRM6, so you can get in close and do damage, and I am not that great of a pilot. You can't circle strafe, you are way too out in the open for that, you need to find close cover and use it to peak and do some damage and settle back in. So if you want to run brawlers, you can, but you need to learn where the cover is, and I think this is where the angst is, none of us have played it often enough to know the ins and outs of the map yet to know where and when to pick your battles. I learned some by watching some videos of the map on YouTube, I would suggest the same for you.

To the argument that you will know where you are dropping, yeah, you couldn't possibly land in a city thinking the battles would happen there only to find out the population and military had fallen back to a more mountainous region, say landing in River City{i.e. Portland/Calgary} and having the fight happen in the surrounding areas of Alpine{i.e. Rocky Mountains}. You need to root them out quickly before reinforcements can arrive and swarm you under. NO, that could never happen in a real worldish scenario, that's just crazy talk.

I really hope that when CW is out, you have 3 or 4 drops in a row against groups, where you pick 1 mech and have that mech all matches till either you leave the world or win it on random draw maps. Seems more canon/realistic to me.

[Taemien]

This thread has done nothing except show the true colors of today's gamers. They are so unable to adapt that they are willing to whine and cry up to 18 pages in a forum thread about one map destroying their configs. 15 years ago, a gamer would have been glad to have a new map and would have altered their configs to adapt to the new situation.

They ignore all reasonable and logical solutions, instead blaming PGI for their own shortfalls. I give it another week after finding out PGI will do nothing to help them before they turn on the rest of the community and call people using Large Lasers and PPCs cowards and exploiters for not using short range weapons.

Units, take a good look at this thread. These are the players you do not want in your units. They cry about using TS and certain tactics. They are less likely to learn your unit's tactics and strategies and more likely to say, "freak it, I'm doing what I want." and then will yell and whine when they get annihilated and complain how your members didn't help them. You do not need that frustration.

To of those of you willing to adapt, or heck, didn't need to adapt like myself who use mixed weapon loadouts, you have my compliments. You will do well in the future and will make great teammates or foes. Its a shame, because those other players are why we have 8-0 stomps. Some of them are even in premades getting stomped by PUGs, its hilarious and true.