Phase 2 Quirk Pass: Feb. 17th

There is no perfect solution with so many variable that MWO has, but I would rather have MANY mech builds that work great for varying play styles than only a handful of meta-builds. There are so many good builds across the board now. So what if the MOST effective TDR-9S is 3-4 ERPPC, you don't have to run that setup. You can run 2 ERPPCs, some mediums, and a larger engine. You can still customize a mech however you please and it will still have some advantages from the general quirks.

On the other hand, pre-quirks, you would have a BEST chassis what was chosen specifically for the hitboxes and the hardpoints. Why take a 50 tonner over a 55 tonner when one has more hardpoints and more armor and it's big guns on the shoulder? You would immediately handicap yourself because of the MECH you chose, not the build necessarily.

Now, you have a reason to take a HBK-4G over a SHD-2D2, or an Awesome over a Victor, or a Dragon over a Cataphract. etc.

 

And there's a huge risk to some of them... that DRG and WVR arm comes to mind.

There's also a reason I rarely use the DRG-1N anymore.

 

Taking a DRG-1N is a huge risk now. people have gotten used to that arm being the target and more specifically the DRG-1N as a priority target in general. It goes down so quick if you don't play carefully. Still kicks ass though, but much less in group queue.

 

Think of quirks as a sort of weird inverted version of tabletop's failures for changing things on your mech from the stock build. Instead of having misfires for swapping that ERPPC for a LLAS out you just don't get the quirks.

 

You can have quirks without going weapon specific. You can design the game to where all weapons are effective in the right configuration.

 

In the right configuration? Please elaborate.

 

Really? There HAS to be a balance between "most weight per class" and "best build per quirk." I just don't like to have to bow to what the Dev's think my build should be on a certain mech...

For example, I LOVE the ON-1K for LPLs... But, what advantage do I get? U/ACs, MLas, Ballistic, and missile??? Com'n now... To use this build to it's fullest potential, I HAVE to run it with U/ACs, Mediums, and LRM/SRM... That's just PGI pushing their build over mine... I don't like that at all...

 

But... to take YOUR build to it's full potential, you keep it exactly how YOU like it. Then it still benefits from the general quirks and still has it's own role compared to something built specifically with the quirks. Maybe you were confusing "Build" with "Mech". Yes, some mechs now have a very good set of quirks to boat a specific weapon, but the Orions are a good example of the majority of quirks. They have some for specific weapons, but have very little impact on a specific build you want to run. Huginn, yeah SRM4s or you're mental. DRG-1N, yeah 2 AC5s or you're mental. There are a few that don't have many options, but never had many options to begin with. I get what you're saying, as a min/maxer it hurts to see that the mech has wasted potential buffs if you don't take a specific weapon combination, but in regard to balance and diversity across all the mechs, quirks solve a lot of problems. Builds for certain mechs become less diverse, but you see A LOT more viable builds across all the mechs combined. The quirks give more than they take away imo.

 

What I mean is make burst vs. Sustained a viable consideration. Make alpha vs chain a valid consideration (whether or not you mix-n-match). Make brawling, fire support, etc. all have their role.

As it is, alpha wins. Even with quirks and ghost heat, alpha wins. This is unless you have an AC5 quirk or something like that. They would need to change things like effective health and DPS scaling over time in order to let different playstyles (defensive and offensive) win.

 

Alpha will always win so long as 8-12 people can target 1 enemy at a time. You can't survive the focused fire of even a single lance for long, so the ability to leave cover, alpha, and get back to cover is essential. As long as you can shoot at them, they can shoot at you. Unless you're always on the team that sets up the firing line first alpha will be better in general. Also, the faster you kill an enemy the less incoming damage you and your team take.

 

Yes and no. I'm an advocate of Alpha (and rely heavily on TDR-9S's in CW) but there are plenty of mechs that work very well in the sustained fire mode due to quirks or something about the chassis. I mean are you lot seriously arguing that the Stormcrow, Timberwolf, Firestarters and Wolverine laser vomit boats are bad? Those are sustained due to the beam length but they get by with advantages such as clan XL engines or extended range quirks to reduce vulnerability. All are also mobility and flexible, able to constantly move quickly across the battlefield to engage and disengage as needed.

Its particularly relevant in arena's where weight restrictions are in place and I get plenty of kills with my WVR-6K's in CW due to their combination of mobility and damage. Often you need to look at what sustained fire is good at .... I killed 3 lights with one WVR-6K in my last CW match over a very short timescale while they rampaged through our team. Intimidating and dissuading opponents is also a strength if its sustained ballistics. They work well on the attack but are weak on the defence as you usually have to poke with your weapon arm. They're ultimately a tool if on a good chassis like any other. Are they better... no... Are they as useless as you're all implying with your black and white examples/comments... no...

Coincidentally I have to be honest and say surviving in a sustained fire (non assault) mech takes a lot more skill and patience than snap fire. Its why I generally prefer snap fire...

 

I'm not saying sustained mechs are inherently bad, just that they take a lot more skill and patience to do well with. After all, if your initial alpha doesn't kill then you're doing less DPS than the sustained damage mech, so your TTK goes up, but you can often get back into cover for the cooldown time. With a sustained damage mech you have to be much more careful about your positioning. The same thing applies to pinpoint vs spread damage. So while they're reasonably balanced at the higher levels of skill and effort, as soon as you want to decrease effort or don't have the skill it becomes better to go for mostly pinpoint, alpha damage.

 

There are so many factors associated with what makes the "best" build for a certain mech. I would argue that your play style, team composition, luck, etc. are just as important as how you built your mech. The addition of quirks just adds another dimension that you can choose to play to or ignore depending on what you think the effect will be on your overall performance and ultimately how much fun you have.

For me, Oxides are a good example. I absolutely suck at them. When the quirks came out I got all fired up like Jo-Jo the circus boy to finally have some good games in my Oxide and went out and continued to die in the first 3 minutes and do 2-300 damage per game. I'd do better putting two LRM5's on and spam missiles all game (which I've done and it's lame). No amount of quirk benefits make up for my suckage when it comes to running the Oxide.

Of course statistically you may do better over time by playing to a mech's quirks. Most of the time that will give you the advantage and it makes sense to use what you have. Statistical success, however, doesn't always translate into fun (except for a few people who really get jazzed up by statistics). I got Ace of Spades in an alpha Warhawk but I enjoy my dakka Crab more so I play it more often.

Check out the quirks - try them - but don't be a slave to them. It doesn't hurt you to go away from the quirks if you can make the build work for you. And if you can't make it work due to other factors, no amount of quirking will fix it.

 

Whether its optional or not depends on the quirk. Something 10 to 15% and its optional. But put SRM 2s on a Hugin or a Gauss on a DRG-1N and you are severely limiting the capability of the chassis.

 

They just need to do one thing to really level out the playing field. Make gyro overload a thing, that way if you get hit with too much sustained heavy fire you get knocked over. Or if a light runs off a cliff, it falls over and doesn't hit the ground running. All that heavy clan firepower doesn't mean anything when the direwhales are belly up because they got an AC20 at point blank.
Just my thought.

 

Goes both ways though. If you get hit by a whale you get knocked over and basically means death.
I am happy to see the current agile lights actually.

 

Except its not them which will struggle... we're already at 8% lights and really don't need things turned even further against them. If you're applying logic the least affected mechs would be the assaults.

 

Figured I would reconfirm...Russ had put out a tweet that made it seem like the quirks could be delayed, but he replied to me today that they are a lock for the 17th. We'll see if we get a list of what is and is not changing before then...

 

I had the same thought the other day. Weapon specific quirks can be fun if it backs up the lore or stock loadout... but it also takes away like 75% of the creativity, and alongside limited weapon module slots, promotes boating rather than mixed builds.

 

Shamelessly copied and pasted from the redacted one