18 replies to this topic

[Tarogato]

I often find myself whining about LRM turrets in game because once activated they are relentless at their 1000m range. Often times it's so far away that you might not be aware it's a turret, so you'll sprint for cover assuming you have 40-80 LRMs coming your way from the enemy team, not a dainty base LRM-10.

Included below is a screenshot on Caustic Valley I took while trying to engage with an enemy mech around the corner of the Caldera. After checking for UAV, Narc, TAG spotter, or other spotter, I eventually realised the culprit was an LRM turret 1000m away directly in front of me. I decided to screenshot it.

Spoiler

Using that screenshot, I could draw a line representing the range of the turret and expand it to a circle displaying the full coverage that LRM turrets have across the map. As you can see, not much of the map is left uncovered when all turrets are accounted for:

Caustic:


I did the same for Canyon Network, as I often found myself being targeted from stupendous ranges by the red base turrets, and sure enough, they reach as far as D4. The blue base turrets usually aren't a problem since there's usually more cover blocking them, they tend not to engage.

Canyon Network:


But the real winner here is Mining Collective. I've been engaged by turrets from the middle of the map before, often where the mech forces collide. Once they lock on, they tend to stay engaged until you're practically back at your own base. Sure enough, once I overlayed the ranges on the map, their target zones even overlap:

Mining Collective:

---

Now I know that LRM turrets are easy to deal with - they rely on line of sight and they don't track targets (you can literally side-step them at the last second), but it's not the fact that they're hitting me that's bothering me, because they're not - it's the fact that they disrupt battle from halfway across the map with barrages of "Incoming Missile" warnings that often force you to reposition. These turrets are no longer playing defense, they're practically on the offensive.

Anybody irked by this?

[627]

Always thought those turrets have only 450m range but no min range for that.

[Lily from animove]

dunno, on mining I think they are fine, they are rather equally distributed.

on Caustic they are an issue becasuse they are an advantage for the team in the north part of the map because the interfere a lot more wiht the usual battle area around the caldera. The southern turrets however are not really much of an isse.

on river city they are totally annoying because the map is too small and they cover most open areas between the bases making battle there an annoyance because of the lack of cover (which is plenty on mining)

[MadMaxMKII]

those turrets are the reason i stopped playing assault mode.

[Kilo 40]

I would change them to SRMs. it would better match the medium laser turrets.

[Risen]

I try to avoid playing assault since the addition of the turrets

they act as UAVs, breaking through ECM without any lock on time and granting lock-ons for friendly LRM mechs (the most stupid ability of all)

these abilities create so small attack vectors on most maps (there aren't many to begin with) and counteract all possibilities to flank or light harass due to their 1000m proximity alert

change them to SRMs and remove the UAV effect

[Lily from animove]

Kilo 40, on 14 January 2015 - 02:04 AM, said:

I would change them to SRMs. it would better match the medium laser turrets.

they would be pointless if so, because they would be outsniped too easily. you go in, it opens, while openign you go bakcwards out of range, and poof boom pew, turret gone.

[Kilo 40]

Lily from animove, on 14 January 2015 - 02:18 AM, said:

they would be pointless if so, because they would be outsniped too easily. you go in, it opens, while openign you go bakcwards out of range, and poof boom pew, turret gone.

you could say the same thing about medium laser turrets. they are negated by large lasers and lrms.

[Risen]

Lily from animove, on 14 January 2015 - 02:18 AM, said:

they would be pointless if so, because they would be outsniped too easily. you go in, it opens, while openign you go bakcwards out of range, and poof boom pew, turret gone.

change the placement behind cover so they can shoot at the base area but can't be shot at from outside (behind the buildings on River City would be a good example)
maybe when they are well behind cover you could either leave them open or increase pop up speed

[Tahribator]

Not only that, but they can also spot for LRM boats on the other team. Those turrets should be removed or exchanged with Streak turrets.

[MeiSooHaityu]

They probably should be SRM2 or 4 turrets.

Really, all turrets should be is a base rush deterrent.

[PhoenixFire55]

Turrets are fine except that they shouldn't spot/lock targets for their team. Its assault mode that needs to be changed. Any mode with base defenses must be asymmetric because otherwise there is zero reason to leave your base.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Base defense turrets should be rearmed with SRM6+Art and 2 MPL, and even then, they only activate at 400m

[mogs01gt]

Glad Im not the only one that gets frustrated as hell at bitching betty warning about LRMs when its the ******* base!

[Pjwned]

MeiSooHaityu, on 14 January 2015 - 02:52 AM, said:

They probably should be SRM2 or 4 turrets.

Really, all turrets should be is a base rush deterrent.

The deterrent should simply be the team defending their base properly.

[RAM]

PhoenixFire55, on 14 January 2015 - 02:53 AM, said:

Turrets are fine except that they shouldn't spot/lock targets for their team. Its assault mode that needs to be changed. Any mode with base defenses must be asymmetric because otherwise there is zero reason to leave your base.

And yet no one bothers to defend...


RAM
ELH

[Nothing Whatsoever]

If anything, maybe use the original range for LRMs on the Turrets, which is 630 M.

[Alistair Winter]

Its all fun and games untill you're riding a non-ECM light mech and getting smashed by turrets on the other side of the map. I mean, sure, it's easy to avoid them. But they also really restrict where you can move with non-ECM light mechs, making the gameplay more dull and leading to more deathballing.

I actually think turrets, as they work right now, have made Assault more similar to Skirmish, instead of making it a completely different experience. The old tactic of splitting up your team to send a lance capping is rarely used anymore. Defending your base is much less of an issue.

I mean, the whole concept of both teams defending a base with a sudden death victory if someone caps is going to lead to boring, static gameplay anyway. And the idea of standing on a box to win is not really too inspiring either.

[Tarogato]

Praetor Knight, on 14 January 2015 - 04:28 PM, said:

If anything, maybe use the original range for LRMs on the Turrets, which is 630 M.

My number one suggestion would also be a range reduction. 630 might be a bit drastic, but it might also be appropriate. I'd have to overlay some 630m diameter circles on the maps to see how I feel about it. The fact that LRM turrets pummel you from range (presumably before you're in effective range to deal with them) is good, it just gets a little out of hand on the smaller and more cramped maps where they can get LoS to you over large distances from where you clearly aren't assaulting the base.

Once upon a time I thought to myself, they should change them to MRM turrets... but MRMs are way out of timeline.

Alistair Winter, on 14 January 2015 - 04:45 PM, said:

I actually think turrets, as they work right now, have made Assault more similar to Skirmish, instead of making it a completely different experience. The old tactic of splitting up your team to send a lance capping is rarely used anymore. Defending your base is much less of an issue.

I mean, the whole concept of both teams defending a base with a sudden death victory if someone caps is going to lead to boring, static gameplay anyway. And the idea of standing on a box to win is not really too inspiring either.

I never thought about that, but you're completely right. Assault usually plays out like Skirmish because the end goal isn't really that enticing: you don't get the satisfaction of actually destroying any structures, you just sorta sit still on a wee box for a minute or so and hope enemies are dumb enough to not also sit still in the same wee box while you whittle down what is effectively a Windows Progress Bar. There's really no 'assault' involved in taking the base, you just sorta saunter over there while the enemy isn't watching (and... they don't, because there's no incentive to actually defend a base when you can walk your team back to it in plenty of time to defend in most cases).

I'm now curious how it would play out if the bases capped a lot faster - like.. significantly faster, so that you'd have to make a conscious and necessary effort to leave behind a defense force to hold the base and send a strike force to meet the other team. Rewards for capping could be drastically improved to incentivise assaulting the enemy base instead of turtling.

Risen, on 14 January 2015 - 02:42 AM, said:

change the placement behind cover so they can shoot at the base area but can't be shot at from outside (behind the buildings on River City would be a good example)
maybe when they are well behind cover you could either leave them open or increase pop up speed

This is some good brainstorming, I like the idea. Perhaps it would only take a tiny bit of effort to customize the map slightly (add a wall here, put a barrier there, move the turret to this location instead, etc) such that these turrets have proper cover, can cover the base and entrances to it, while also not having LoS halfway across the map where mechs might not be intentionally engaging them.

Risen, on 14 January 2015 - 02:18 AM, said:

I try to avoid playing assault since the addition of the turrets...

And it seems you're not the only one that feels this way. Though you may be the vast minority of people that actually give a dam, it's interesting to note that this issue is indeed a significant deterrent from the gamemode.

Perhaps with a little more attention, we can get PGI to consider implementing slight changes along the lines of what we're discussing here. More feedback is still appreciated.

Edited by Tarogato, 17 January 2015 - 03:34 PM.