Jump to content

Why Can't We Choose A Mech For The Map?


  • You cannot reply to this topic
88 replies to this topic

#41 De La Fresniere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 622 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:22 PM

View PostAgent of Change, on 20 February 2013 - 02:16 PM, said:


Not to be too much of a **** but you could try to build a mech that is heat efficient no matter what and is either fast enough or armed properly to deal with or evade threats at all ranges.

can't help you with the maps you don't enjoy but I assure you allowing people to pick maps would fall prey to the law of unintended consequences in a BIG way.


So that's it, all non-heat-efficient builds are unusable because we *might* get a hot map? All other specialized builds as well?

And no, there isn't really any weapon combination that would work on any map (at least for a 50-ton or lighter mech) except maybe LRMs and that often depends on having a competent spotter (also, it's mind-numbingly boring; can't target sections or even need to aim). I'd *love* a grenade launcher type weapon, but apparently the people of 3050 decided that wouldn't be as useful as a 64m range Flamer that does more harm to yourself than to your target.

All I can say is if we can't choose our maps, I will not be playing the game no matter how polished the final product will be at release in 2014.

Edited by De La Fresniere, 20 February 2013 - 02:24 PM.


#42 Yankee77

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Knight Errant
  • 410 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:25 PM

As has been stated, one of the reasons we cannot do so is to prevent custom fitting mechs specifically for a given map, which is something we could always do because of our extremely flexible mechlab.

This sort-of replicates the situation in lore, where mechs can't really be modded willy-nilly, and it would be extremely difficult to get mechs perfectly suited for a given theatre (especially since a theatre usually means a whole planet, which has very varied terrain). So, basically, like Mechwarrior in Battletech, we have to make do with what we have at the time.

I for one like it, as it does encourage balanced builds... even though I do wonder how it'll work with Community Warfare.

Thank you.

Yan

#43 SkyCake

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 524 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:26 PM

View PostJoseph Mallan, on 20 February 2013 - 12:17 PM, said:

Cause that feature isn't added yet? ;)


If they add this feature in, I'm uninstalling, like breaking my hard drive uninstalling... it would undo all of the balance they have worked so hard to achieve... it would be like getting to look through your opponents magic deck and side boarding in perfectly before a match.... our recent poll of maps fostered one thing and one thing only, race to the bottom cheese builds!!! Now with alpine, people can no longer bank on close combat, and so now they are forced into playing, what real men call, MECHWARRIOR!!!

Edited by SkyCake, 20 February 2013 - 02:26 PM.


#44 One Medic Army

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,985 posts
  • LocationBay Area, California

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:30 PM

View PostDe La Fresniere, on 20 February 2013 - 02:22 PM, said:


So that's it, all non-heat-efficient builds are unusable because we *might* get a hot map? All other specialized builds as well?

And no, there isn't really any weapon combination that would work on any map (at least for a 50-ton or lighter mech) except maybe LRMs and that often depends on having a competent spotter (also, it's mind-numbingly boring; can't target sections or even need to aim). I'd *love* a grenade launcher type weapon, but apparently the people of 3050 decided that wouldn't be as useful as a 64m range Flamer that does more harm to yourself than to your target.

All I can say is if we can't choose our maps, I will not be playing the game no matter how polished the final product will be at release in 2014.

For lighter mechs you get speed. Speed is a weapon. Speed allows you to use shorter range weapons in longer ranged engagements.

If you don't want to play because you can't tailor your mech to the specific map you're playing on, then that's your issue. Some of us build mechs that can work on any map, and enjoy seeing the optimized one-trick-ponies getting "encouraged" to branch out a bit.

#45 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,739 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:38 PM

View PostDe La Fresniere, on 20 February 2013 - 01:48 PM, said:

I gotta admit this is really getting to me. I thought this patch would rekindle my interest in playing MWO. Spent 10 or 12 million on a Trébuchet and started trying out different loadouts. Got River City Night and Frozen City (day) a lot, and I hate playing a game that has no image, so that was a pretty bad start. Then... pretty much every build I tried put me on whatever map was most awful for it. 4 MPLs? Caustic! Whenever I push the Launch button, there's 2/3 chance I'll get a map I won't enjoy. *Then* there's the possibility of mass base rushes or LRM ******* contests or just plain inept players... There's too many variables. Choosing maps is one we could actually fix. If everyone picks Alpine with tons of long-range weaponry, what's the problem? Better than hoping you'll get a map you don't hate, hoping your build will work, hoping your camo doesn't make you stand out because it's totally inappropriate for the climate, etc... Ah well, I think I'll just keep monitoring the forums and abstain from playing. The game's over a year from release, there's just too much stuff that's not in-game yet.


So, because I'm in a trial mech set up for anything in a game based on books and other games that have default mechs that are set up for any range, or I like to use actual tactics in mech design that actually mimic a lot of good things from the basics (such as coming prepared for any range engagement), I should be penalized because everyone else wants to run boated, range specific builds with huge weaknesses to counter their huge strengths on maps they specifically selected to work with their builds strengths and not feel the effects of their weaknesses... why exactly? If you want to run that close build, you take the risk of being placed in a long range battle. I think it's refreshing to have one real map break away from brawleronline and make this MWO. Wait. That's right this is Whinersonline. Sorry. Continue.

#46 De La Fresniere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 622 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:48 PM

View PostOne Medic Army, on 20 February 2013 - 02:30 PM, said:

For lighter mechs you get speed. Speed is a weapon. Speed allows you to use shorter range weapons in longer ranged engagements.

If you don't want to play because you can't tailor your mech to the specific map you're playing on, then that's your issue. Some of us build mechs that can work on any map, and enjoy seeing the optimized one-trick-ponies getting "encouraged" to branch out a bit.


You're making up problems that don't exist and ignoring the ones that do.

I don't give a damn about Lights, I don't play them.

Mostly I'm finding the fact that some unacceptably awful maps can't be avoided. That's a really big thing. As I said, I will not play a game that will put me into those maps, it's really that simple.

I do also have a big issue with specialized builds being either too good or terrible depending purely on *random chance*. It's stupid and it's a totally unnecessary loadout restriction.

So if we can pick our maps, we'll see only brawlers in brawler maps and long-range/sniper mechs in large maps with little cover. What's wrong with that? At least it'll be balanced every time, and everyone will be able to use specialized builds without either dominating completely or being completely useless.

Less playing in maps we don't like, more usable loadouts, more balanced matches.

Anyway, there's no point in arguing, the designers will decide. They should just be aware that a lot of people will not play the game if they are forced to suffer through the more awful maps on a regular basis.

#47 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,739 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:58 PM

I so wish there was a dislike button here...

#48 Void2258

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 500 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:58 PM

I agree that letting people try to custom outfit a mech at the beginning of a match is a recipe for disaster. How about letting people save multiple loadout per mech with a title on them? Obviously you must own the needed parts to be able to have the loadout in your saved list. Then they could pick the right loadout for the map during selection.

So flow would be:
  • Click launch
  • See map
  • ~1 min for team discussion of tactics and balance during which each player:
    • Pick mech
    • Pick SAVED loadout
    • Pick Camo
    • Pick lance (have actual lance assignments for coordination purposes)
When time is up the match launches. Now everyone is in the mech they want, with the loadout they want, and the team is all organized even if pugging.

Edited by Void2258, 20 February 2013 - 03:01 PM.


#49 De La Fresniere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 622 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 02:59 PM

View PostTesunie, on 20 February 2013 - 02:38 PM, said:

I'm in a trial mech

I think it's refreshing to have one real map break away from brawleronline


If you're in a trial mech, you've got more issues than I can help you with. Trials should only be put into matches against other trials.

Also, it's almost impossible to brawl right now. A lot of the maps just don't allow it, and those that do usually have those ridiculous SRM cheesepults because SRM boating still hasn't been balanced. It's a shame because brawling is by far the best part of MWO; much more subtle and intellectually stimulating than any other type of combat. Keeping everyone's position in mind, deciding who to go after and which section to focus first, keeping potential exits and/or cover locations in mind and updating them as mechs move around, concentrating on twisting at the right moments to redirect damage to less damaged sections... that's the good stuff.

Anyway, screw this, I've got some work to do on my house and I could be playing a bunch of good games right now... internet arguing is really not something I should be wasting time on.

#50 Bleary

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 365 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:00 PM

The presence of Caustic in the rotation has never prevented heat inefficient high alpha builds from being popular and effective.

We have never been able to choose our maps. This has never been an issue. Now we get one map, one map of eight where maybe a 50 kph Atlas with nothing that can shoot past 270m is at a disadvantage, and suddenly this is a controversy?

You don't get to load up your shotgun class on Call of Duty and choose to play nothing but Shipment. Hyper-specialized builds are supposed to be a gamble. That's the trade-off. That's the reason your 'Mech has the ability to mount half a dozen different weapons. If you want to boat nothing but medium lasers, you get an advantage in a knife fight but you're prey to the snipers in big open spaces. Deal with it. Or maybe tear out a couple mediums and some heat sinks and stick a large on there so you can poke them back. The same way that LRM boats have always had to mix up their loadouts with mediums and SRMs so they can defend themselves when they are inevitably drawn into a brawl. If they have managed it all this time, you can do it too.

Edited by Bleary, 20 February 2013 - 03:03 PM.


#51 Lycanstrom

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 47 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:02 PM

If I had a quarter for every time someone said "pick your maps" in this thread, I could buy a b u t t l o a d of MC. Seriously folks... I said **pick your mech**.... not MAP. FFS. I even followed up on page 1 explaining this again and saying I have no problem with random maps. I would like to be able to pick a mech. Not. A. Map. Does everyone have that straight now?

And for those crying that min-maxing will take over: I disagree. I have nearly 30 mechs, and the vast majority of them are well-rounded builds based on the maps we've been playing up until this point. My KDR is fantastic and I have no problem killing people in their min-maxxed mechs all day long. I do it every time I play. In fact I look at it as my dirty little secret.... play a mech that can excel in *most situations* and you're ahead of the curve.

Implying that the min-max people will CHANGE their actions because of 1 long range map is far more stupid than the option I'm asking for. Min-max gamers will ALWAYS min-max. Period. End of story.

#52 Vasces Diablo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 875 posts
  • LocationOmaha,NE

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:08 PM

View Postkeith, on 20 February 2013 - 02:14 PM, said:


did u even play MW4? that little river is nothing to the park land in big city. big city had a 1k by 1k park in the middle. that death river run u compare it too, is not the same. i played MW4 for over 6 years in NBT. in that time many FOTM builds came and went, many different tatics that u can not do on these maps happened. u keep saying u want mixed configs, well guess what they do not work, well. that is y we need a lobby system with the map before hand, and capping gone.


Assuming we could pick our mech for our map, give me a valid reason why I wouldn't run a beam mech painted stark white every time I played frozen city. My 6 PPC arctic white stalker is gonna look awesome on the Alpine map.

As for capping, I'm sorry to hear that there is a mechanic in game that again, forces you to be flexible in your tactics, but I'm sure ill be able to get to sleep tonight.

It's amazing to me, that as you say we should have room to be creative, you are asking for things that will lead to a single play style.

#53 Lycanstrom

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 47 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 03:46 PM

View PostVasces Diablo, on 20 February 2013 - 03:08 PM, said:

It's amazing to me, that as you say we should have room to be creative, you are asking for things that will lead to a single play style.


I'm not saying I agree with the post you quoted by keith, but I will say this about the above quoted snippet:

It amazes me that you think your opinion of what will happen is the only valid opinion.

I'll reiterate once more: the vast majority of my own mechs are well-rounded even though most of the current maps lead to brawling. Assuming that everyone will play "a single play style" makes it sound like you're too simple-minded to see any other route. Judging by some of your previous posts it's obvious you're smarter than that, but that comment really irks me.

#54 Orgasmo

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 320 posts
  • LocationCanada

Posted 20 February 2013 - 04:14 PM

View PostShadowsword8, on 20 February 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:


That would be lame.

You'd end up with SRM Online in River city and PPC Online on Alpine.

Current situation is better: you can go long range, close range, or mix, and each of those three choices have risks you'll have to assume. That risk is the thing that give value to the choices you make. I find it fairly childish to want to remove it.

You also say that customization allow you to use tactics. On the contrary, it limit you to only one tactic, chosen before you even know what the enemy brings or what he's doing. That doesn't sound very "tactical" to me...


There's a chinese saying that go along those lines: "Beware what you wish for, for you might obtain it".

Customization is one of the major selling points of MWO, otherwise the mechbay would be useless. Why not stick with stock mechs if you do not modify your mech to your playstyle? Contrary to the lore, nearly everyone in this game rolls with endo and DHS upgrade, being lighter and cooler. You don't think that's also cheese?

You would not fight the same way in a jungle as you would in a desert. In fact, you don't even need to let players pick maps, instead just let them know ahead in advance. They can pick from the 4 pre-selected ones prior to the match start.

#55 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,739 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 20 February 2013 - 10:24 PM

View PostDe La Fresniere, on 20 February 2013 - 02:59 PM, said:


If you're in a trial mech, you've got more issues than I can help you with. Trials should only be put into matches against other trials.

Also, it's almost impossible to brawl right now. A lot of the maps just don't allow it, and those that do usually have those ridiculous SRM cheesepults because SRM boating still hasn't been balanced. It's a shame because brawling is by far the best part of MWO; much more subtle and intellectually stimulating than any other type of combat. Keeping everyone's position in mind, deciding who to go after and which section to focus first, keeping potential exits and/or cover locations in mind and updating them as mechs move around, concentrating on twisting at the right moments to redirect damage to less damaged sections... that's the good stuff.

Anyway, screw this, I've got some work to do on my house and I could be playing a bunch of good games right now... internet arguing is really not something I should be wasting time on.


Did you even read what I was hinting at, or stop right at trial mech? The stock Centurion has a good, well balanced weapon load out. Maybe a few changes in engine size, upgrades (DHS or Endo seen as the game lets you)... but overall, the weapons are good. My point is, the weapons on that stock mech are balanced. It can hurt you no matter what range you are in. Yet, as soon as people see it, they load up on SRM6's, Med lasers and etc, because the maps are so small.

I have a Dragon set up just like a Centurion. A stock Centurion. People have told me I should replace my LRMs for SRMs for max damage. I haven't. Why? Because with LRMs I can damage you even if you are far away. I have a Stalker with 4 LRM5s and 6 med lasers. Most people tell me I'm a waste and should remove some lasers for more LRMs or dump the LRMs for Large Lasers. Yet, I'm a deadly opponent in that mech, even at range. Why? Because I followed the same principals used for the creation of the stock mech designs. Updated with the better lost tech available to me of course.

My point was, should I be hindered because you can choose your long range mech because you see a long range map coming up, where as my mech is designed to work at any range? But, if you focus on brawling, you can out brawl me. You focus at range, you can out range me. But, if I go to close in, and you have nothing but range, I still can have the advantage. If I keep my distance on your all brawler, I can have an advantage.

You are also talking about, what? One map? Is that one scary map so much that you might have to change your build just a little to add on some kind of long range weapon on your brawler? Us long range weapons users have been forced to brawl on every map so far. Is it bad that we who prefer a little range combat (LRM or sniping) get a little map that we can do well on for once? Is it too bad that boating builds (which people have been railing on LRM boats for so long, and laughing at them when they only boat LRMs) have a weakness? I think it's about time that short range focused builds are getting laughed at for a change. We've been telling you short range boats what you have been telling pure LRM boats all along, get some diversity into your build so you aren't eaten outside your range band.

View PostBleary, on 20 February 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

The same way that LRM boats have always had to mix up their loadouts with mediums and SRMs so they can defend themselves when they are inevitably drawn into a brawl. If they have managed it all this time, you can do it too.


I think you said my point for me very nicely. We LRM and Sniper builds have had to place some close range weapons at the expense of our long range style, maybe you close range pilots should take a hint and do the same. Take some long range fire to offset your close range weapons. You might be amazed what a single LRM5 rack is capable of, if you tried it. If nothing else, hearing the "Incoming Missile" will get people moving. They don't know if it's 5 LRMs, or 50 LRMs coming in...

View PostOrgasmo, on 20 February 2013 - 04:14 PM, said:

Customization is one of the major selling points of MWO, otherwise the mechbay would be useless. Why not stick with stock mechs if you do not modify your mech to your playstyle? Contrary to the lore, nearly everyone in this game rolls with endo and DHS upgrade, being lighter and cooler. You don't think that's also cheese?

You would not fight the same way in a jungle as you would in a desert. In fact, you don't even need to let players pick maps, instead just let them know ahead in advance. They can pick from the 4 pre-selected ones prior to the match start.


Cammo is one thing, mech selection is different. If you wanted to change something like Cammo selection before a match, I could support that. Changing your whole mech load out for the match... would break the game. No one would bring in short range weapons to the long range maps. No one would bring in long range weapons to the short range maps. Splatcats and Brawling Atlases would still flood the field, and no one would get any diversity of builds. We'd see the same mechs flood certain maps, while other maps would see other same mechs flood them. Diverse builds (like the ones we see as cannon and stock designs) would be obsolete. Why mix SRMs and Large Lasers anymore? Why bring PPCs and some SRMs for close range? Why take weapons for multiple range bands at all? Just boat all that you can for the range band best suited for the map, and go with it.

If you could select mechs knowing what map you where going on to (or select maps to work with your mechs, either way) it would be disastrous to mech builds. The boating people are complaining about now would be even worse. Even going outside lore base thought here, it would actually promote more boating than we already have. People would design high heat for max damage for the snow maps. Long range, low heat for Caustic. Brawler mechs for City (and maybe Forest colony as well), and probably reuse the long range low heat mech for Alpine (or bring a focused sniper mech).

If things are left as they are now, people who want to be competitive on all maps with a single mech will have to consider not maxing in one section, but instead have some weapon to do some damage at any range, run fairly cool even for Caustic, and have enough close range weapons for the cities. If you change it to the suggested "bring a designed mech of your choosing to this random map", you will see the above specialized mechs only. The Devs, and us loyal players from MW2, TT, and readers of the novels, are wanting to see the game move towards more diverse builds, similar in effect to the classic mech load outs we see. (Be thankful us lore people haven't pushed for the mechlab to be removed. Mechlab is a blessing, yet also something that would rarely happen in lore. I like the mechlab, even if it results in some builds that probably would never be seen in Battletech. Mechlab is good, but it does lead to a lot of OP builds. As a friend of mine says in a usually joking manner, "Mechlab is OP." )

#56 Bromineberry

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 436 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 10:31 PM

View PostSean von Steinike, on 20 February 2013 - 12:20 PM, said:

Because it leads to better balanced builds in mech instead of moron specialized cheese builds. I am absolutely against picking a map of choice.



Exactly this.

The funny thing is, in the past months noone seemed to care about this. Now PGI has relesaed one map, which is one map out of eight, that is bigger and makes life for short ranged builds harder (but not impossible) and suddenly people care about not knowing which map comes up next. That makes me lol.

Edited by Bromineberry, 20 February 2013 - 10:32 PM.


#57 PwnStars

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 35 posts

Posted 20 February 2013 - 11:12 PM

Interesting... it seems that most of the players here want to control how other players play. I believe that the issue of certain maps favoring a certain type of weapon exclusively is a design flaw. Each map needs to combine cover and range pretty much equally. For example, maybe Alpines should include some large sections and flanking routes that are extremely close range with plenty of cover, while other routes favor long range with little cover. The real strategy? Luring the enemy to engage on your home turf and then destroying them where you are strong.

A lot of players keep saying speed is a "weapon", but speed can be cheese too. 140km/h SSRM raven that can't be hit? Wow, that's skillz. 4xPPC that overheats like crazy on Caustic? Nah, that's a cheesy build, get more speed and build balanced.

If people are so concerned with boats, PGI should just make boating impossible (for example, only allowing a certain amount of the same weapon on the same mech, ie. you can't have more than 3xSMR6 on any mech). This will force people to build "balanced" builds. Also, if players were allowed to choose their mech before the start of a round, then you could set up a variety of builds that would fit that particular map. That way, you solve everyone's problems: 1) No more gimmick builds (No other shooter allows you to roll 3 rocket launchers and 20 grenades, why is this acceptable in MWO?) 2) People can pick a mech for that map and not be completely useless, thus making the game for themselves - and their teammates - more enjoyable. Using CoD as an example, their Pick-10 system allows great flexibility, but you still can't roll 5 bouncing betties. So a limitation on boating isn't necessarily taking away player choice, but adding diversity and creativity in builds (rather than what most players are suggesting: taking away choice by always having to build a jack-of-all-trades build so you can be decently effective on a random map)


View PostBleary, on 20 February 2013 - 03:00 PM, said:

The presence of Caustic in the rotation has never prevented heat inefficient high alpha builds from being popular and effective.

We have never been able to choose our maps. This has never been an issue. Now we get one map, one map of eight where maybe a 50 kph Atlas with nothing that can shoot past 270m is at a disadvantage, and suddenly this is a controversy?

You don't get to load up your shotgun class on Call of Duty and choose to play nothing but Shipment. Hyper-specialized builds are supposed to be a gamble. That's the trade-off. That's the reason your 'Mech has the ability to mount half a dozen different weapons. If you want to boat nothing but medium lasers, you get an advantage in a knife fight but you're prey to the snipers in big open spaces. Deal with it. Or maybe tear out a couple mediums and some heat sinks and stick a large on there so you can poke them back. The same way that LRM boats have always had to mix up their loadouts with mediums and SRMs so they can defend themselves when they are inevitably drawn into a brawl. If they have managed it all this time, you can do it too.



Also, are we talking about the same Call of Duty? You should know that you had multiple load outs that could cover multiple situations (ie. sniper, stealth class, assault, launcher, etc). So yes, you can use your shotgun class - if you wanted to - every time Shipment comes up, and use your different classes for different maps.

Edited by PwnStars, 20 February 2013 - 11:13 PM.


#58 Metharoth

    Rookie

  • 6 posts

Posted 21 February 2013 - 03:03 AM

View PostOrgasmo, on 20 February 2013 - 12:28 PM, said:

Players should be aware of what map is coming up, and able to change loadout, modules and camo in preparation. Soldiers don't get blindfolded then thrown out at random places where they do battles. Instead, they prepare themselves and formulate plans prior to going in. Customization and tactics are the name of the game.


As a MECHWarrior on the other hand, you probably know, where you fight a few hours before but changing your loadout alone would take weeks and keep some wrenchman busy in that time not talking about ordering a new mech which you should not even have because they are this expensive.
Now you know WHY canon mech have a variety of weapons in their loadout instead of 6 srm6.

#59 Tesunie

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Seeker
  • The Seeker
  • 8,739 posts
  • LocationSeraphim HQ: Asuncion

Posted 21 February 2013 - 08:53 AM

View PostPwnStars, on 20 February 2013 - 11:12 PM, said:

Interesting... it seems that most of the players here want to control how other players play. I believe that the issue of certain maps favoring a certain type of weapon exclusively is a design flaw. Each map needs to combine cover and range pretty much equally. For example, maybe Alpines should include some large sections and flanking routes that are extremely close range with plenty of cover, while other routes favor long range with little cover. The real strategy? Luring the enemy to engage on your home turf and then destroying them where you are strong. A lot of players keep saying speed is a "weapon", but speed can be cheese too. 140km/h SSRM raven that can't be hit? Wow, that's skillz. 4xPPC that overheats like crazy on Caustic? Nah, that's a cheesy build, get more speed and build balanced. If people are so concerned with boats, PGI should just make boating impossible (for example, only allowing a certain amount of the same weapon on the same mech, ie. you can't have more than 3xSMR6 on any mech). This will force people to build "balanced" builds. Also, if players were allowed to choose their mech before the start of a round, then you could set up a variety of builds that would fit that particular map. That way, you solve everyone's problems: 1) No more gimmick builds (No other shooter allows you to roll 3 rocket launchers and 20 grenades, why is this acceptable in MWO?) 2) People can pick a mech for that map and not be completely useless, thus making the game for themselves - and their teammates - more enjoyable. Using CoD as an example, their Pick-10 system allows great flexibility, but you still can't roll 5 bouncing betties. So a limitation on boating isn't necessarily taking away player choice, but adding diversity and creativity in builds (rather than what most players are suggesting: taking away choice by always having to build a jack-of-all-trades build so you can be decently effective on a random map) Also, are we talking about the same Call of Duty? You should know that you had multiple load outs that could cover multiple situations (ie. sniper, stealth class, assault, launcher, etc). So yes, you can use your shotgun class - if you wanted to - every time Shipment comes up, and use your different classes for different maps.


If this is how you feel, you apparently don't know anything about battletech and just here for the "stompy giant robots". You want CoD? Play CoD. You want Mechwarrior, then play this game. If you want to know what us fans expect, read some of the Battletech novels.

In the novels (other games for the most part, and TT as well), you had normally one mech per mechwarrior. They were expensive and most mechs lasted for generations being passed down through a family. It normally didn't get customized (expensive to do) and you brought it into whatever battle you needed to, whether it was suited to the job or not. They normally tried to match mechs to the role they were best suited to, but couldn't always do so. The only mechs that could change weapons easily and on the fly were omni mechs, which don't exist right now. It was what made the clans brutal compared to the inner sphere. Being able to change their mechs on the fly in a few hours of work made their mechs fit any situation. But even the clans knew not to boat a weapon system and keep good balanced weapons on ready for anything.

To quote you, it looks like you want to control who other people play the game. You're the one asking changes to the game, not us. You seem to want to make this Call of Duty: Mechwarrior edition.

Edited by Tesunie, 21 February 2013 - 08:55 AM.


#60 Mike Townsend

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 143 posts
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationRedmond

Posted 21 February 2013 - 09:24 AM

View PostMerc85, on 20 February 2013 - 12:23 PM, said:

I agree 100%


It also makes the game terrible for a lot of non-cheese builds. Imagine new players running trials, with the hunchie P as a trial, on Alpine. Even modified, that variant is basically designed as a pure short mid ranger. You could swap out for a pair of ppc and nothing else or swap some mediums for smalls and put a single large on, but it'll never be decent on Alpine and it'll be less effective everywhere else. They should force you to pick a chassis or class before drop but let you choose your variant after. Elo is only on a class by class basis, so it wouldn't impact matchmaking.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users