Play style balance, huh?
On looks:
Guilty as charged. I use humanoid legs because I'd like to indulge in the illusion that I'm using a Macrossevagundam Orbital Frame. I have my limits when it comes to balancing looks and stats though, at times, the coolest looking part can be the suckiest. So, I'll settle for the next coolest part with the next to suckiest capabilities. Yeah.
On play style:
It's easy to say what my playstyle is, it can be summed up in generic terms like mid-close range fighter, missiler, bombardier, etc. However, my what my playstyle is not the question. Let me just tell you how I formulated my playstyle... In just three steps.
Step 1:
I think, in the beginning of my AC days, I just built a frame that looked good and developed a playstyle around it afterwards. I saw AC as a game where I can build my own frame. Just so happens that the frame I wanted to own looked like a Macrossevagundam Orbital Frame.
Step2:
So, I played and thus developed a style to suit the frame I built. Fortunately, I had AC buddies that were diverse in their tactics, so I was exposed to different situations and learned to adapt -- using the frame I built. My frame had lots of weaknesses. So I had to make up for them in terms of manual control. Low def? Evade. Slow legs? Boost-hop. Low weightcap? Adjust the weaponry. Weak weapon? Make every shot count. The list goes on.
Step3:
Finally, I tune my frame and its stuff to make making up for its weaknesses easier; moving, turning and evading are easier, red locks are are instantaneous, range blindspots are minimized, etc.
Basically, these three steps repeat whenever I think of a new frame to build. Whether there is a point to using them aside from aesthetics or not, I still use humanoid legs because I want and choose to. I don't think I have to rationalize using bipeds because I'd only be wasting my time, with all the arguments abound. I'd much rather enjoy AC with my friends than try to fend off an "only faggots use bipeds" argument, if there was one.
On Imba parts:
Generally, the use of cheesy parts is frowned upon, but their existence in the game cannot be denied. One of my friends used "imba" parts and for a time he was unbeatable. But alas, the rest of us got so used to exposure from these "imba" parts that their performance was nerfed to that of an ordinary assault rifle or a mediocre arm because the rest of our game caught up. So, we agreed that there would be no restrictions when it comes to part usage. "If you're so irritated that he wins because of specs, then use the same specs. Don't worry too much about diversity because the 2 frames will never be the same' the runners are different." So I said. besides, you get bragging rights if you win with a non-imba configutaion. Even if the score was 20-1. Yeah.
For me, It was narrowed to 3 choices:
1. Do I want to win?
Sure, gear up on parts that make winning easy.
2. Do I want to use the Macrossevagundam Orbital Frame?
Let's make a cool looking but sucky stat frame.
3. Do I want to win while using the Macrossevagundam Orbital Frame?
See Step 3 and there will be a possibility.
I choose 3 most of the time. Yep, I'm a greedy man.
To sum it all up, I went (and still go) for aesthetics and adjust my play accordingly.
On looks:
Guilty as charged. I use humanoid legs because I'd like to indulge in the illusion that I'm using a Macrossevagundam Orbital Frame. I have my limits when it comes to balancing looks and stats though, at times, the coolest looking part can be the suckiest. So, I'll settle for the next coolest part with the next to suckiest capabilities. Yeah.
On play style:
It's easy to say what my playstyle is, it can be summed up in generic terms like mid-close range fighter, missiler, bombardier, etc. However, my what my playstyle is not the question. Let me just tell you how I formulated my playstyle... In just three steps.
Step 1:
I think, in the beginning of my AC days, I just built a frame that looked good and developed a playstyle around it afterwards. I saw AC as a game where I can build my own frame. Just so happens that the frame I wanted to own looked like a Macrossevagundam Orbital Frame.
Step2:
So, I played and thus developed a style to suit the frame I built. Fortunately, I had AC buddies that were diverse in their tactics, so I was exposed to different situations and learned to adapt -- using the frame I built. My frame had lots of weaknesses. So I had to make up for them in terms of manual control. Low def? Evade. Slow legs? Boost-hop. Low weightcap? Adjust the weaponry. Weak weapon? Make every shot count. The list goes on.
Step3:
Finally, I tune my frame and its stuff to make making up for its weaknesses easier; moving, turning and evading are easier, red locks are are instantaneous, range blindspots are minimized, etc.
Basically, these three steps repeat whenever I think of a new frame to build. Whether there is a point to using them aside from aesthetics or not, I still use humanoid legs because I want and choose to. I don't think I have to rationalize using bipeds because I'd only be wasting my time, with all the arguments abound. I'd much rather enjoy AC with my friends than try to fend off an "only faggots use bipeds" argument, if there was one.
On Imba parts:
Generally, the use of cheesy parts is frowned upon, but their existence in the game cannot be denied. One of my friends used "imba" parts and for a time he was unbeatable. But alas, the rest of us got so used to exposure from these "imba" parts that their performance was nerfed to that of an ordinary assault rifle or a mediocre arm because the rest of our game caught up. So, we agreed that there would be no restrictions when it comes to part usage. "If you're so irritated that he wins because of specs, then use the same specs. Don't worry too much about diversity because the 2 frames will never be the same' the runners are different." So I said. besides, you get bragging rights if you win with a non-imba configutaion. Even if the score was 20-1. Yeah.
For me, It was narrowed to 3 choices:
1. Do I want to win?
Sure, gear up on parts that make winning easy.
2. Do I want to use the Macrossevagundam Orbital Frame?
Let's make a cool looking but sucky stat frame.
3. Do I want to win while using the Macrossevagundam Orbital Frame?
See Step 3 and there will be a possibility.
I choose 3 most of the time. Yep, I'm a greedy man.
To sum it all up, I went (and still go) for aesthetics and adjust my play accordingly.
