100% this.
Last night I built a 9k PS - 5 kapcan, Argus shield build.
Can that build get MVP? Highly unlikely! BUT that’s not what it was built for and it made for some awesome games where I set up kills for the team. I had a blast.
Now… is my KD to MVP ratio going to take a hit because of that?? I wouldn’t know, because I don’t give a F@&!
I had just as much fun building the car then I did playing it.
If that is the wrong way to play XO… then I guess I don’t want to be right.
My decision of what to play is what sounds fun to me.
[/quote]
I like to play in one build per session when I am playing solo. For example, I played a session last night, all Helicon. The solo time before, all Nothung. Unless I am with a group, I like to get a build and stick to it until I’m done playing Crossout. In a group, I shift around and try to find a meta synergy with my group members.
Thanks for the reply.
In this instance, we’re in complete agreement. Obviously, using all the trick we’ve laid out gives you an enormous advantage in this game. That advantage - if you’re using all of them compared to someone using none of them - is insurmountable. So, I think we agree on that.
The thing I was stumped on was understanding how using those tricks makes you a worse player of this game - or worse - somehow immoral or cheating.
Better vs worse in this context is simply your ability to win matches & get higher scores.
@122160823 XO-Guy for example… I’ll kinda pick on him. He’s clearly a better player than I am. I’ve watched some of his videos, and the dude plays his very non-meta artsy-builds like an old hillbilly plays a fiddle (that’s very very well for you city folk). I’ve watched him solo against multiple metas and come out all but unscathed. He’s good. I don’t care if you don’t like what he says on the forum or not, the dude is good. Very good. Maybe the best I’ve seen footage of…
That being said, in my opinion, he’d be a better player (again - referencing my previous definitions of better vs worse) if he played more meta-builds. I figure he’d obviously win more and get more points.
I’m not suggesting he should do that. He’d no doubt have less fun… so would I watching his videos. Meta-hover-bricks are ugly and boring to watch (unless it’s watching them get roasted by something beautiful).
I figure - again picking on XO Guy - he’s better than most of the dudes running hyper-meta builds, but he’d be even better than HIMSELF if he abandoned making his builds look nice & started going strictly meta.
If he did that - exploiting every mechanic in the game - that’s not him using a crutch, cheating or being immoral in any way. That’s him being the best at CrossOut that he can be.
Same x 100…
Same again, and I freely admit that what I choose to play would lead to more victories if I didn’t insist on it looking somewhat like what you might see in a Mad Max movie. That’s on me…
This is very much how I play… sometimes I take things into battle just because that ONE kill I’ll get is going to be hilarious. Sometimes, it’s strictly a support build like you’re saying. A fast stealthy minelaying build in good hands can turn the tides of most matches.
I wish I had that discipline. I get bored too easily. 
Then I’d get bored real fast, I already know I’m good and can perform well if I used those meta builds but not using them is the challenge I give myself; but also to look good doing it in my own unique art build.
He means it makes you “lame” to use “crutches.” It’s pretty straight forward. Some people refer to it as “use it or loose it.” I’m not sure why it’s stumping you guys (it’s not just you, apparently).
Here’s an exaggerated example:
One guy plays Mozart on the record-player. He gets every note right, every time, effortlessly. Neat, right?
The other guy plays Mozart on the Piano, misses a note or two periodically, and it’s very difficult. Bummer, right?
If they both practice this behavior, only one person will be improved.
Musicians play.
Fans play.
I think that’s the point.
…or am I missing it too?
If your build does all the work for you, like if you downloaded some META build from the exhibition, you might win a lot, but you’re not improving your abilities to play this game much, and it’s a complicated game…mostly. I mean, anybody can win with a melee brick, and I suppose some kids will only win with a melee brick, because it is a “crutch-build.” It’s easy to be cheesy, and that’s why people roll their eyes at it.
That established principal has a wide range of applications, hence the common metaphor, “crutch.”
No. I don’t think you do.
Yes I do.
People want to feel like the hero in games.
So some people will create rules and missions for themselves to enjoy their experience more. Kind of like in the game “mine craft” where you don’t have any quests so you have to make them up.
This is simple human nature.
Some people will take the role of the “Good Guy” and when something goes against one of their made up rules/morals they can feel like they won even if they lost.
For example: let’s say people think Emily is OP - so if I go into a battle and someone kills me with an Emily I can be “Dumb META player! You wouldn’t have killed me without your crutch loser!!” OR “Did you see that, I wrecked that META Emily loser!! I’m awesome.”
Both examples above are created with false conditions in their own heads.
Would you rather be superman
or would you rather be
superman exposed to kryptonite.
Superman= Meta build
Exposed Superman = all other builds.
Has zero to do with morality. It is game mechanics that have the same rules for EVERY player.
Most people choose the more powerful option because who fantasizes about being a weak wet worm?
The false assumption begins when players place self determined limitations on their use of game mechanics. I’m more “moral” than you. I set my own false limitations, my “morality” allows me to accept others may not want to try making a rocket build that i can tap boosters and stay in the air. Was it “immoral” of me to just build a fun build with zero weapons? The game does allow you to enter matches without weapons.
However, morality depends on the society you live in, not a video game’s mechanics. (false equivelant)
Finally someone who gets it.
Thanks, Doc.
I don’t think this is correct. I play and have played every movement part and play style. Wheeled builds are not more or less difficult than hovers to drive or play. Some guns and play styles in the game are difficult and unrewarding. For example, Pulsar, Assembler, Mandrake and Heather are weapons that have a high skill curve and you are likely to be punished for playing them.
Some guns in the game are slightly less difficult and highly rewarding. Scorpions, rockets and Mastodons fall into this category.
There are some people who have mastered the Incinerator, or Mandrake, or Heather and can do astounding things with these weapons. We have a crack incinerator player in our clan. He is our crutch because we play with him, and become used to our enemies continuously burning. There is such a thing as being good with a weapon. But, it is not true that playing wheeled builds or off meta builds means you are secretly a better player than the meta player that you deal with. It just means that you like what you like for whatever reason.
The game highly rewards players who do extremely well with some comparatively cheap and easy to obtain weapons:
Kaiju, Heather, Incinerator, Cricket, Mandrake Flute and Destructor. If you are a a frustrated player and want to be off meta while showing your true skill, master one of these, and you will get plenty of recognition (and uranium).
I remember I was the last man standing in PVP in my fully healthy Firebug build, and Illhan Omar, an Xbox player, was playing Heathers on a Harpy wheel build and sitting on the edge of a cliff on the Fortress map. I drove up the hill, and then chased him off the Cliff. When he landed, he shot his Heathers straight up in the air and one shotted me midair into 80 pieces. Since then, I avoid taking obvious lines when dealing with a good artillery player.
I don’t think that’s what _Lemmy_44 was doing by referring to the META as a crutch. He tried to explain it, I tried to explain it. I thought it was simple and easy to understand, and I’d heard of that principal before…and experienced it myself.
You’re just taking it personally, like he insulted you, when he didn’t.
Seriously you’re playing a game where you can use fuel barrels as an offensive weapon if you want to. The idea of morality in this game should go out the window. It’s a sandbox combat game where you do whatever it takes to win.
I think if you were going to compare it to music, it would be more like the difference between a guitar player and a techno producer.
The guitar player has to rely more on his physical skill, but also probably cares a lot about what guitar and amp they’re using, not to mention what strings, effect pedals, and even picks.
The techno producer doesn’t have to rely as much on their physical abilities, but does have to have a deeper understanding of their equipment and the science of sound. They’re also equally passionate about their equipment choices.
I’ve done both, and feel like both are valid. I don’t think we need to elevate one approach over the other. You could make an argument that the best contemporary musicians are ones that borrow from both approaches. Maybe the same is true for Crossout?
Ya all asking yourself the wrong questions. “Do I want to perform with the best chances or prove something to myself or…”
That’s not the question you should ask yourself. The question you should ask yourself is “Do I want to be able to use the huge variety of parts available to me and not get trolled by the game because my pick is complete garbage?”
I’m not sure how “half the weapons and movement parts are garbage = bad” is such a hot debate on this forum since I joined. When a new Diablo game gets released and a character sucks ass, people don’t go “JuSt PlAy NeCrOmAnCeR aNd OvErCoMe”. You think 80% of the items should suck and people should be forced to use the 20% decent ones? Then apply for a job at Targem, having some clues about game design is probably not a mandatory skill for the job.
That’s exactly how I play as well. I’m just not as good as you are at the game. LOL win or lose, the uglier my build, the less fun I am having.
I most certainly do this virtually every time I play. Sometimes, when I am feeling silly, my rigs in the game reflect that. I set up a little rule to see how many wins I can get in something that looks nothing like any meta build or real vehicle.
I have taken into battle a flying dragon, a flying duck, a dog dragging its butt, a turtle, a block of cheese, a flying Christmas tree, a woman in a bikini, a telephone…
Other times, it is something that would look right at home in a Mad Max movie.
It is almost never a meta flying hover box. That bores me to death.
All of this is because of little rules I put on myself. Little restraints. The important thing is that I never apply those rules to someone else, thereby thinking I am somehow a better person or better player for crippling myself with artsy builds.
Exactly…
Anecdotally, I was recently playing one of my artsy builds it came across the same meta hover box player over several matches. There was simply no way I could kill him. Was he more skilled than me? I don’t know. I do know, though, that a big part of why he kept beating me was because I was the one crippling myself with something that looks good. That’s my fault, not his. To think I’m somehow better than him is just silly to me. That to me is actual coping.
Please add a smile in your voice when you read my post.
I am not offended.
I am not mad.
I am not insulted.
I’m just having a conversation about people and games. If you imply tone or emotion to my posts then that is only something your feeling.
To go back to XO specifically and how parts are balanced… Feel free to explain to me why Assembler or tracks are good game design and just something “to overcome”.
All of this reminds me of the original Mortal Kombat game’s leg sweep. If you were too moral to exploit that, you were basically choosing to lose. LOL
Ding ding ding, we have a winner 
100% man.
Setting restrictions and missions for yourself is fun. It makes the game better.
This is healthy fun play.
Just don’t be a 
and expect people to play with your rules.
Everyone is just here to have fun.
Imagine loading up a new shooter and going to Google to put “What is the best weapon/setup/class in X game” and then you run that for 5 years.
People don’t understand the whole no-meta self challenging way of playing, they literally can’t comprehend it which I find quite interesting.
If you’re running the meta 24/7 or a meta build/style all the time then you should always win or be winning or doing the best so to those who do this and lose: you’re a really bad player and your cope arguments make me laugh.
Every time you lose or perform poorly in a meta build please remember that it was literally the best possible option with the least points of failure and you still couldn’t perform well with it