AC: Style balance

[Grim]

This topic was triggered by the new rule we have for PACT III. The limitation on part use really made me think.

The root of most people being biped-centric in their designs, aside from trying to emulate the look of their favorite mecha, comes from the inherent advantages offered to them by the biped model, as well as the ease with which they can be used/piloted. I think this cuts across all the AC games so far (well, everything except AC4). With that said, one has to believe that when a player gets more and more acquainted with the game and finishes that early inclination to make mechs and pretend that they're Gundams of some sort, he or she will make smarter decisions as to what parts to use, as well as really develop a playstyle of his/her own. However, like all AC communities show, a large part of them still choose to use bipeds, and go with the prevalent style of play.

Even when compared against the backdrop of the jumping prowess of RJs and the stability offered by quads and tanks, a majority of players, myself included, patronize the biped legset and play with generic and pretty much overused weapons. Is it because they're just used to the basic design, and aren't willing to pilot anything else?

While that may have an effect, I think style balance has a part to play as well.

In the original ACs play was skewed heavily towards bipeds and RJs employing a certain amount of stun. Tanks didn't stand a chance, really, what with their turning speed and the presence of certain weapons called the Moonlight and the HG235, except for maybe a light tank equipped with one of the grenade launcher arms (forgot the name, or even if they were grenade launchers; basta the ones that shot out beams that exploded on impact). Not to mention generally claustrophobic areas to fight in.

AC2 tried changing the landscape, giving us more open arenas and giving RJs quick turning so you couldn't out-turn the little buggers while they shot you from the sky. With energy weapon arms. With the Limiter Released. HEAT HEAT HEAT OPD OPD OPD OMGMYAPISDOWNTO0.

AA gave you quite the same, although with a little more subtlely to it (which is why I constantly ramble on about it, it's my favorite out of them all).

3 and SL, well, speed was the weapon. Hit hard, hit fast. Equip the rifle on one hand, the sniper rifle on the other, and you were good to go. If you didn't want speed, maybe you wanted defense. Wow-defense-level-stacking is all I can say to that. >_>

NX and NB, which is where I really spent a lot of time relearning the game, had some heat in them, making you go for the coolest parts while striving to keep up your mobility so you wouldn't get hit, while at the same time packing a lot of heat yourself (literally).

EDIT: Forgot LR. Attack from range.

My question is, with every new game that comes out, is it already skewed towards an imbalance in different playstyles, statistically? Could you really use one AC with all the right ingredients and run over everything else with it? To a lesser extent, in the games where other legsets were brought up to a comparable level with bipeds, was there any real point to use them aside from aesthetics? Could AC really exist with just bipeds to play with, the question of variety notwithstanding? Am I asking too many questions?

Discuss.

Oh yeah, personally, I think every game as a whole is skewed, towards one style or another. I don't think From intentionally programs one game to skew this way or that way though. To me, it's just a case of the different numbers interacting. And maybe some incomplete game testing.

[Sforza]

If I had boosters attached to my back, I don't think I would bother with plain old jumping even if I had grasshopper legs. However, if I had four legs that would prevent me from ever being knocked out in a boxing match, I think I'd keep them even if they were tiring to use.

If there really was one AC with the best possible parts combination, someone would have constructed it already and it would be all over the internets. Japanese gamers are another breed of human. Also, I use "illegal" part combinations on purpose when playing Rick sometimes, but I still end up doing better with my own designs.

If AC had only bipeds, it would still be playable. I also think that people are hardwired to automatically like choice when shopping, though.

If a game were skewed towards a certain style of play, then everyone, from the informed n00b to the veteran, would live and die by that style of play. The game would probably be judged as a failure of sorts, though.

Oh, and the person that owns a domain can never ask too many questions on his own domain

[NiX]

In AC1, bipeds were definitely the easiest to use. RJs were pretty good too, and I know this because my most competitive MOA design was a RJ. I don't really know how Quads fared then because I was too ignorant to even care about Quads back then. As for the tanks, yeah they most probably didn't stand a chance now that I think of it. Blades ripped them to shreds aside from them not having anything to guard against missiles other than the core's MG Response (assuming the core did have CAMS in the first place).

In AC2, bipeds and RJs are still particularly good. At least in AA, bipeds have some of the lowest turning speeds in the game. It was a good move in my opinion, as it gave bipeds a distinct disadvantage. Quads look good to me so far (or maybe I should say "Quad," as only one Quad leg part seems to be attractive). And with GL available to them, are definitely up there with bipeds in this game (assuming GL is legal. Is it?). Tanks also seem very viable, at least on paper. They have excellent turning speed with an excellent turn-booster available for added security. The newly introduced OB also allows them to move away from those that try to get behind them. Decoys and CAMS also work great. And again, with GL on the back of a tank, everything will be a-okay. I'm just not sure how effective armor is in AA though. So on paper, based on my limited AA experience, those four leg types seem viable, although there simply aren't enough options for tanks and quads as there are for bipeds. In AC2, OB was king. In AA though, the newly introduced discharge heat really toned OB down.

AC3 was the game that got me hooked to AC. It introduced one part that changed AC forever (at least in my opinion): THE HOWITZER. Yep. Because of that part, I haven't equipped blades on my ACs since. It was like a foreshadowing of things to come. The presence of OP-Intensify hampered my (and several other people's) growth.

Now SL was the game where I stopped being a noob. I really LEARNED the game for the first time because for so long, I had been playing AC only paying attention to the weight of a part and the maximum capacity of my legs. This time, I learned what ALL the stats did. I finally learned to design properly. I hadn't been going to AC forums yet when I was getting good with SL so things took time but I still grew at a steady pace. I was really happy with the addition of left hand rifles but when I used them, I merely tapped onto the circle button every once in a while and didn't get the most of it. Eventually, maitreya, whom I was playing against, started shooting both his right and left guns simultaneously at me and I got totally owned. We instinctively new then that that was the direction to take with SL. And with OB heat not being as big a deal as in AA, it was obvious that OB was king once again. Bipeds were obviously the best choice in this game. Some RJs were also top-tier too. I hadn't been playing with Quads yet back then so I can't really comment. Tanks... well they were viable if one had the necessary OB jousting skills (and having LOTS of armor of course). So... yeah in SL, you had these auto-staples: 008 core, hadro arms, biped/rj legs, SRA02 fcs, Dual rifles/MG-800. It was probably not the most balanced of the AC games but it was definitely one of the most fun for me.

Now Nexus... wow it probably had even more auto-staple parts than SL. CICADA2, E2/UA, XS arms, DINGO2/COUGAR2/LHT, Dual Wyrm/Dual M2, Dual Missile+extenions/Dual GLL. Yep. That pretty much constitutes all the useful external parts in Nexus. And I did that out of memory, which is a testament to how memorable NX's brokeness was. -_- I dropped NX shortly after.

Didn't play Ninebreaker.

Now LR... yeah I think FROM finally got it right this time. It still isn't perfect but I can say that it's probably their best product so far. There are probably more bannable parts than the previous games (as seen in our PACT rules) BUT there are far also far more usable parts than in any AC game before it. Numerous core types to choose from. Numerous competitive weapons. Actual variations in internals (in other AC games, the gen with the highest output was good enough for everything). Clearly defined roles for each leg type. Bipeds and quads however are definitely top tier although RJs and Tanks are still a very close 2nd tier and are just as viable in the hands of a specialist in my opinion. In LR, it's clear that accuracy is most important. Defense is also valuable. BUT! -and this is where LR shines- Creativity is still rewarded even on a competitive level.

Can't comment on AC4 as I have not played it. And based on feedback from others, I don't even want to play it.

*I'm not even considering hovers in any of the AC games. They simply don't seem to be for competitive use. -_- IMO, their only use is for missions with water involved. They just don't seem to be as well thought out as the other leg sets.

Conclusion: Looking back at everything I wrote, it is clear that biped will always be a prime choice. So... to answer your question, it is most likely that AC is indeed a game for bipeds. However, I wouldn't love AC as much if it didn't have the other leg types to spice things up. Now if only they'd make hovers actually useful.

As I've said before, I wish AC was a patchable PC game that the developer could periodically tweak. This is because it is simply IMPOSSIBLE for a game as technical as AC to ever be 100% or even just 75% balanced upon release unless it goes through a really long beta testing or something like that.

[Grim]

...if I had four legs that would prevent me from ever being knocked out in a boxing match, I think I'd keep them even if they were tiring to use.

Good point. Unfortunately, the legs that allow you to move the fastest at the lowest amount of risk, for as long and as far back as I can remember, are biped legs. Again.

AC3... introduced one part that changed AC forever (at least in my opinion): THE HOWITZER. Yep. Because of that part, I haven't equipped blades on my ACs since. It was like a foreshadowing of things to come.

Yeah, the beginning of dual gunning was the beginning of the end for blades. After AC3, it was clear that using one against a player of the same skill would lead to nowhere, fast. All the ninja moves you learned in the previous games were totally invalid already, what with the other player's ability to just attack from a longer range. Dual guns underlined the fact that sometimes skill isn't enough to overcome superior part combinations. Skewed playstyle.

It [SL] was probably not the most balanced of the AC games but it was definitely one of the most fun for me.

Agreed. After I calmed down on finally getting SL I noticed that certain parts did have that "auto-win" status: use them and you win. SL was like a throwback to the earlier games, putting in a ton of speed at relatively low opportunity cost to the player. Alas, all this potential for fun ended up maligning the possibility of the game having just enough balance (for me, it didn't).

*I'm not even considering hovers in any of the AC games. They simply don't seem to be for competitive use. -_-

joust had a good run with hovers in a previous MoC, but then again, this incident is more of an exception rather than a rule. It's possible, but highly improbable.

As I've said before, I wish AC was a patchable PC game that the developer could periodically tweak.

This is what AC4 is. Unfortunately patches don't answer the question of lag.

I'll wait for a few more opinions on this one, but the evidence presented seems pretty clear that yes, every game has a certain imbalance to it. It's not just in the types of legs though, it's in all other parts as well, which constitute the type of AC you're going to make, and incidentally, dictate the playstyle you're going to use. For example, not using OB in SL, while still possible and very much playable, just doesn't yield the same potential and advantages in higher level play. All ACs at the tourney-level had 008, and basically if was all over for you if you faced a skilled opponent without one. Or how dual Wyrms killed anything in Nexus. RS > anything in LR. The list goes on and on. Of course, this doesn't bode for the customizability that is supposed to be at the core of the game.

That brings me to another series of questions. So let's say that going against the grain in AC, generally speaking, gives you disadvantages. Say you use a shotgun against a sniper in LR. Does putting up with these parts necessarily make one more skilled, and a better player? Once you're used to the crappy stuff, are you really all that better with the good ones? Is there merit in using garbage? Like jumping with weights, once they're off will you find yourself jumping higher and farther?

Oh, and the person that owns a domain can never ask too many questions on his own domain

True, dat!

EDIT: Despite all this bitching however, I still love AC for the fact that I can make a pretty unique AC and do fairly well with it. Not win each and every time, mind you, but do fairly well. I guess my point with this whole topic was to show (mostly to myself) that it's alright to experiment, that not every AC needs an HP on the left hand, have Gull boosters strapped to the back, and be cooled by Ananda.

[clonezero]

since time immemorial I've sticked to biped and Rjs but I also used tanks and Rjs

original - MoA : lightweight high speed no boost mech (never was a fan of long distance boosting)
my first stable design was a lightweight high ground running speed design tooting an energy machinegun and the auto wave blade ... I also pawned my first opponent with it ... but we were both noobs


2: played it for a while ...no comment didn't play it enough

nexus: the my main design here was a tank legged heavy weapons grenade launchers on both hands and an LX on the back ... quite the gamble

LR: well no main stay but unlike nexus Im really avoiding hovers now everything else is taught about as a possible design..

[Lord_Leperman]

I think people strike a balance between functionality and style, but in my case I'm more inclined to use style than function but I have a certain functionality threshold for each AC which cannot be compromised (a certain speed rating, or a certain armor level for example which I won't trade-off unless the returns are more than reasonable).

I suppose some have some sort of 'honor' system in place, such as Wanzerfreak's "for every overpowered part I place, I'll equip a sub-standard part in its place" which also works and makes for some variety in designs. Others just go for a specific leg-type for both functionality and style like Twin Skies quading his AC for the past 3 years or Grimlok with lights, which shows that people like to specialize. Others like Nix with preference for different leg and weight classes (which he does well in all really). I took a look at my garage collection and I see mostly bipeds, and it makes sense since bipedal legs have the most number of parts available in the garage.

As for the question of crappy parts improving one's game. I really think it depends on the weapon itself. I'd like to point to the example of the SHADE and SHADE2. The former is well used and has good stats while the latter is heavier, has less ammo and has a higher per-shot-drain (almost twice as large) than the SHADE while having only a modest increase in attack power. Using the SHADE2 'can' help you train in better energy management and prepare you for using the SHADE more effectively.

On the other hand, I don't think using inferior weapons can train you since I am a firm believer in knowing what weapons you have in your arsenal. For one, knowing exactly what your AC and your weapons are capable of will allow the player to fully push the extent of the ACs capabilities. All strengths and weaknesses are accounted for by the player and you'll be able to fully time your movements in tune with the situation. How many shots can my laser rifle fire while still having enough energy for maneuverability, while at the same time being able to deal considerable damage to your opponent? Will I be able to chase my opponent down with the current booster system I'm equipped with? These are questions whose answers need the precise knowledge of what your current setup has to offer.

[clonezero]

if ever the only thing common in all my designs is a rather big emphasis on boost length and en drain ... ever since I started playing last raven that's what always is emphasized in my designs ... well most of the times on other times I compromise

[Moonlight_Raven]

honestly I am the type of person in AC that is always bothered about the "design" of my AC... and always think "is my AC has the most number of top-tier parts? maybe I should tone it down a bit" hehehe... I remembered, I never used the G91-ANANDA-VULTURE2 combo

As I read forums on AC, especially about "banned parts", I checked my mech if it is "legal"

like in NX, I'm so sad that the E2 core was broken, by that time it was one of my fave core (coz it made my mech look cool)

now in LR, one example is when the TP booster was banned, it came to my mind "damn, those boosters made my mech look cool)

same goes to other banned parts in LR... you know, when fitted with other frame parts, looks plain nice (hehehe, the LEMUR2 arms)

can't remember when I've mentioned this... I build AC's just not for pure kill power... I am always trying to balance style and fuctionality. oops, just check my signature

I like Bipeds, RJ, Quads... err... tanks and hovers -> for missions only.

also, I have this "guilty" feeling when my design has "too much kill power without the style"

right now, my AC in LR looks like Supplice from AC4 intro... hehehe, but it doesn't have the grenade cannon at its back (I've substituted a missile launcher...) but the concept and the looks are intact.

I've wished that From Software has released a "Balanced" version of LR

despite of everything, I still love the Armored Core series


=^.^=

[Grim]

It looks like some people misunderstood what I meant by "style." It doesn't mean the way your AC looks or how it is aesthetically, style here means how you play your AC: whether you're a light gunner, a range specialist, a rusher, a walking fortress, and so on, and so forth.

The point of the topic was to see whether the latter definition of style could be generalized as imbalanced over the course of the entire series, meaning one type of playstyle could overpower everything else irrationally. So far it seems that AC does lean towards a certain camp at any one point in time (bipeds, or putting your opponents in OPD, or keeping your range). I stand by my earlier opinion though that this isn't actually an explicit intention of From (that is, to make their games unbalanced), I believe that it's all in how the numbers interact with each other.

Yeah, I've come to realize that saying "From should make a more balanced AC" is easier said than done. That's literally millions of combinations you're talking about. And while some of those may be trash, a large part of them are still viable enough to carry weight in deciding stats.

[Moonlight_Raven]

hehehe, ok... sorry Grimlok )

here are some of my thoughts and opinions...

in AC, there are several leg classes with corresponding weight classes. The purpose of this is to expand the diversity of designs. But due to some imbalance in the game, most players would just use on particular class.

There would be a question "why would I use (insert leg, weight class) if one particular class can meet my needs and style"

Piloting styles in AC can vary from defensive, offensive and mobility aspects.

I don't know if this is correct. I will not cover the whole series:

in AC1 series, some players would tend to go with lightweight biped with weapons of high stun (then add a blade combo)

in AC3 - AC3SL, lightweight biped with a machinegun, or with hard-hitting weapons, or an AC with lots of missiles. Others would abuse the OB. Also, the beginning of dual weild arm weaponry.

in NX, the heat factor is too much, so players would just go AC's with high cooling stat parts and high heat weapon. dual weild style is also dominant (like the dual M2, dual WYRM... quite a pain). Underweighting has begun and it nerfed the lightweights

in LR, the back-pedalling style is very common due to projectile accuracy issues.

-0-

My friend told me this "speed is everything". I guess he's right but not 100%... there's always an exception.

-0-

My mind would just think that "most piloting style in AC have relied on speed and agility, combined with weapon accuracy and power, and having decent defensive capabilities"

-0-

Another thing... some piloting styles have been dominant not just because it can really outrun other style, but also because it is coupled with "too dominant" AC parts. I guess the word "abuse" is applicable here.

-0-

A Style would not be effective if you don't equip the right weapons and use the right frame and parts.

-0-

I know that every AC game has its flaws, but for every installment some are fixed... yet some became worse. And the flaws led to abusing the game, which led to the formation of dominant play-style, which led to... and the list go on.

---

Maybe having the most balanced AC game would remain a dream. I guess we have to wait, and deal with the current


=^.^=

[NiX]

AC1... Hrm... I think everyone was too preoccupied with PLUS back then to have truly learned the game. One particular lightweight leg set in the AC1 series was kinda broken in my opinion. It had really high defense, really good carrying capacity, and really light weight with high speed and more stability than a heavy. I forgot what it was called... basta yung 4400 max weight na light. Its only downsides were low AP and pretty high energy drain.
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/jlueu2nl6Aw"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/jlueu2nl6Aw" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
(LOLOL These guys REALLY SUCK)

I don't really know what was dominant in AC3, but from what I've seen in the AC3 MOC, Midweights were definitely top tier while tanks, in the right hands, could really own as well.
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/yggEwXJZnN0"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/yggEwXJZnN0" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

In SL, midweights were DEFINITELY king. Rifles owned pretty much everything as well because of their accuracy, ammo, stun, and even weapon-breaking ability. OB was also the ultimate complimentary weapon.
h<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/cXq58tcKJJA"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/cXq58tcKJJA" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

NX... I don't even wanna talk about it.

Now LR... Wow. Here's a game that, in my opinion, (and with the right bans applied) really allowed some diversity (for as long as the players try hard enough to be diverse).

OB Worked great in the hands of the right players:
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/uAhcvFfeReY"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/uAhcvFfeReY" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

Others did fine without OB:
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/_mX3nnwGWjQ"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/_mX3nnwGWjQ" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>

"Top Tier" was no longer confined to just the midweight bipeds. Heavies (as seen above), quads, and the right kinds of tanks could now be "top tier" as well:
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/vWHmcw0Pv2g"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/vWHmcw0Pv2g" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
<object width="425" height="350"><param name="movie" value="http://www.youtube.com/v/WXIn1s3HKpc"></param><param name="wmode" value="transparent"></param><embed src="http://www.youtube.com/v/WXIn1s3HKpc" type="application/x-shockwave-flash" wmode="transparent" width="425" height="350"></embed></object>
Machine guns, rifles, bazookas, laser rifles, hand guns, they were all viable options now.

Now I'm really looking forward to PACT III.

[Grim]

AC1... Hrm... I think everyone was too preoccupied with PLUS back then to have truly learned the game. One particular lightweight leg set in the AC1 series was kinda broken in my opinion. It had really high defense, really good carrying capacity, and really light weight with high speed and more stability than a heavy. I forgot what it was called... basta yung 4400 max weight na light. Its only downsides were low AP and pretty high energy drain.

I think that was called the LN-2KZ-SP. I should know, since I ran it on virtually everything. ;P Yeah it had everything and then some. And all the Japanese champs used it to great effect.

I think I've hit a rather sensitive vein here. I noticed the Japanese have no qualms about using what's best. They don't care much for variety, just as long as it works (evident in MoA, SL, and AC4). Do you guys think that that's really the case, or is it just a matter of us not understanding their talk on Japanese forums? )

[Lord_Leperman]

For one thing, play styles goes hand-in-hand with certain designs. We could say its the fault of poor part balance that causes the dominating of a specific play style.

I present to you the case of AC: SL where MOB (Mirage Overboost Cores) with their overall superior stats compared to all other core types, made them the prime choice for all designs. It also helps that they have a very efficient and low heat OB functions which encouraged a fast OB game play prevalent during that time. In comparison, the poor performance of EO cores back then resulted in less emphasis on defensive 'regular AC movement' play, and defense had to be brought about through the use of OBing as well.

NX brought about a new heat mechanic which crippled most OB usage, but increased the accuracy of EO cores on the level of primary weapons and giving them stats superior to that of OB and some hanger cores in the game. Making both EOs and Hanger cores prime choices in the in competitive play (the E2 in particular had a nasty damage rate, and some endurance).

The two examples I presented just show that the change in dominating play styles had to do with the performance of certain parts.

I think the formula for success for a dominating play style will have to do with the ease of use of particular parts relative to what it can potentially do.

HP pistols in NB and LR are very good at damaging opponents in CQ with their high damage rate, accuracy, and WS lock box, with the only downside having only 42 rounds of ammo. The ease of use of this weapon (which I equate to almost mindless use) then promotes a 'bum rushing' play style where people simply try to get in close and beat the opponent and expect to win because of the superior capabilities of the weapon.

Dual rifles (the RF-160 with the SRFL/70 along with the SRA02 FCS) in SL made it easy to hit opponents at stand off ranges and the speed and efficiency of OB allowed players to maintain that range throughout the game that encouraged a spam-fest game play (which was still fun because of the blazing speed you had to dart in through your opponent's line of fire just to be able to hit your opponent).

In short, part balance will determine the dominating style of play. If From would want to diversify play styles, then it would have to create effective weapons that would cater to the needs and excel in their specifications that would allow them to be effective weapons for their intended use (which is easier said than done of course).

[Moonlight_Raven]

For one thing, play styles goes hand-in-hand with certain designs. We could say its the fault of poor part balance that causes the dominating of a specific play style.

I present to you the case of AC: SL where MOB (Mirage Overboost Cores) with their overall superior stats compared to all other core types, made them the prime choice for all designs. It also helps that they have a very efficient and low heat OB functions which encouraged a fast OB game play prevalent during that time. In comparison, the poor performance of EO cores back then resulted in less emphasis on defensive 'regular AC movement' play, and defense had to be brought about through the use of OBing as well.

NX brought about a new heat mechanic which crippled most OB usage, but increased the accuracy of EO cores on the level of primary weapons and giving them stats superior to that of OB and some hanger cores in the game. Making both EOs and Hanger cores prime choices in the in competitive play (the E2 in particular had a nasty damage rate, and some endurance).

The two examples I presented just show that the change in dominating play styles had to do with the performance of certain parts.

I think the formula for success for a dominating play style will have to do with the ease of use of particular parts relative to what it can potentially do.

HP pistols in NB and LR are very good at damaging opponents in CQ with their high damage rate, accuracy, and WS lock box, with the only downside having only 42 rounds of ammo. The ease of use of this weapon (which I equate to almost mindless use) then promotes a 'bum rushing' play style where people simply try to get in close and beat the opponent and expect to win because of the superior capabilities of the weapon.

Dual rifles (the RF-160 with the SRFL/70 along with the SRA02 FCS) in SL made it easy to hit opponents at stand off ranges and the speed and efficiency of OB allowed players to maintain that range throughout the game that encouraged a spam-fest game play (which was still fun because of the blazing speed you had to dart in through your opponent's line of fire just to be able to hit your opponent).

In short, part balance will determine the dominating style of play. If From would want to diversify play styles, then it would have to create effective weapons that would cater to the needs and excel in their specifications that would allow them to be effective weapons in for their intended use (which is easier said than done of course).

We have the same idea in mind Lord_Leperman


=^.^=

[NiX]

LOL wow we're actually talking about Armored Core on this Armored Core forum. What a concept! (will edit in something constructive later)