83 replies to this topic

[Fut]

Dymlos2003, on 19 May 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

Stats like K/D are the reason. Stats should just disappear.

Also objective game modes should be added. Ala attack/defend or capture this one point and hold it(king of the hill) Would call for a lot battles. Needs dropships for that though.

I'm all for objective based game modes, but I really don't think that "Dropship Mode" is needed for them - if that's what you meant with your comment.

[ArmandTulsen]

Skirmish with turrets is my favourite.

[Almond Brown]

Bobzilla, on 20 May 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

stuff
Secondly they could make short range weapons more potent, to the point where if you do get close you have a clear advantage. Up LBX, pulses and SRMs for starters.

Won't work, just turns the coin over. Imagine those 4-8 Poptarts that your team can't seem to defend against, now imagine that same 4-8 close range brawlers rolling up your flanks over and over and you still can't seem to muster the firepower to defend against them again.

And if you really believe you would fair better up close, versus from afar, you would be sadly mistaken. The reason many folks hate the poppers is "they" always seem to have better "focused fire" and will continue to do so at any range.

[El Bandito]

Stop blaming each other guys and blame PGI. Specifically the 2-3X maximum range which heavily reduced the viability of brawling.

[Almond Brown]

El Bandito, on 20 May 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

Stop blaming each other guys and blame PGI. Specifically the 2-3X maximum range which heavily reduced the viability of brawling.

Yup. Not everyone got the 2-3X range increases. That sucks the balls right off of Brass monkeys don't it?

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 20 May 2014 - 11:00 AM, said:

Yup. Not everyone got the 2-3X range increases. That sucks the balls right off of Brass monkeys don't it?

You can find them hanging from the back bumper of some Pick up trucks here in the motor city!

[Bobzilla]

Almond Brown, on 20 May 2014 - 09:51 AM, said:

Won't work, just turns the coin over. Imagine those 4-8 Poptarts that your team can't seem to defend against, now imagine that same 4-8 close range brawlers rolling up your flanks over and over and you still can't seem to muster the firepower to defend against them again.

And if you really believe you would fair better up close, versus from afar, you would be sadly mistaken. The reason many folks hate the poppers is "they" always seem to have better "focused fire" and will continue to do so at any range.

You are way off. 2 added maps designed for brawling does not make everyone take brawling builds, that just a silly statement.
And if you don't think you fair better up close vs ac+ppc and lrm vs from afar you are sadly mistaken, oh wait unless that is your load out, i guess i get why you said the silly stuff in the first place.

[Malakie]

wanderer, on 19 May 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:

Long as there's cover, people will attempt to (logically) maximize it. The only effective solutions are weapons that allow one to fire arcing shots over terrain. LRMs would do the job- but ECM hard counters that in competitive levels of play. Same reason partial cover is golden in modern tabletop Battletech- not only are you harder to hit, but shots that normally would hit something are often absorbed by terrain. There's a reason some people suggest 'Mech mortars be added and others Arrow IV/artillery cannons. Mortars lob shots in arcs that clear cover, Arrow IV splashes damage, and artillery cannons do both. All three are available in 3051.

What needs to happen is ECM needs to be available in different levels cost based... additionally it needs to be able to be 'burned through' by an ECCM module if a mech equips one.

[Jon Gotham]

Bhael Fire, on 19 May 2014 - 01:53 PM, said:

I are confused. So...the OP is suggesting that using cover is a bad thing? Leeroy...is that you?

No what he is suggesting is that peeking round a corner firing once then taking 4 shots in return whilst being blocked by allies is bad.
He is also saying being fixated on "that" spot whilst enemy team is flanking and getting ready to surround and murder you is bad.

An example from a match I had in WoT many months ago:
Two heavy tanks proceed to the infamous fail corner on a particular map. They proceed to peek out from the edge pinning enemy tanks behind hard cover and taking hits broadside.
Me and my mate in our ISU152s (with 152mm derp guns that hit for around 800 damage a shot-about 80% of a heavy tank's TOTAL hp) are sat at an angle where of enemy come round the corner we can obliterate them in one salvo. We ask the two heavy tanks to pull back and take an ambush position and we'll smash them as they advance.
One heavy said: "why?" The other said "stop camping noobs."
Both heavy tank players died. We got overrun in the end.

This kind of gross stupidity happens in every match of MWO. People just HAVE to peek.

[Juice-Box Hero]

Captain Stiffy, on 20 May 2014 - 06:15 AM, said:

What the hell nubs? Now you're mad that cover exists?

Next top thread with a million stupid bumps: Please fix that mechs can take damage

Thank you. That is all

[Juice-Box Hero]

Bobzilla, on 20 May 2014 - 08:26 AM, said:

The first thing they could do is make a couple maps that are opposite of alpine and caustic, no sight lines past 500m anywhere on the map, cover that cannont be jumped over (large downtown, with skyscrapers) then throw them in the mix. Those maps would cause ridge humpers, poptarts and lrm boats to change their loadouts, or constantly do terrible on those maps.

I would like to see the map you are referring to, but not for the sole purpose of getting rid of something that I am not capable of dealing with in the game. Many of these posts are just jabs at a portion of the community that has a different play style. You cannot compete with the play style so nerf it?

I hate the fact that every time I shoot at a Shadowhawk, they are jump jetting EVERYWHERE, but I do not come on the forums and say "Remove Jump Jets from Shadowhawks."

[ArmandTulsen]

LOL @ comparing mechs combat to infantry combat.

LMFAO @ the fact that alleged former infantry soldiers claim that mech combat is like infantry combat.

Somebody is full of something.

Edited by ArmandTulsen, 20 May 2014 - 04:38 PM.

[Demuder]

Joseph Mallan, on 20 May 2014 - 09:10 AM, said:

Lets see, Rifle range had me firing from Prone, Sitting and Standing. So you will just die if shot in the leg or foot with a 7.62? Your health must suck something awful.
I was also taught to never run with scissors!

Well, theoretically 7.62 caliber would maim the respective appendage at effective range, can't attest to it since thank God I have never seen anyone hit by them. Maybe I was a bit overzealous about "one shot, one kill", but replace "dead" with "incapacitate" and you still have the same end result,

My point still stands though, modern infantry/armor battlefield tactics have no place in a Battletech battlefield. If they do, there's something wrong with the Battletech simulation.

[Joseph Mallan]

Demuder, on 20 May 2014 - 11:50 PM, said:

Well, theoretically 7.62 caliber would maim the respective appendage at effective range, can't attest to it since thank God I have never seen anyone hit by them. Maybe I was a bit overzealous about "one shot, one kill", but replace "dead" with "incapacitate" and you still have the same end result,

My point still stands though, modern infantry/armor battlefield tactics have no place in a Battletech battlefield. If they do, there's something wrong with the Battletech simulation.

Damn right. That's why I have spent hours and hours learning how to put a 7.62 into a silhouettes head at 500m. I want dead not incapacitated. Dead doesn't get better and try to get revenge.

As to Modern tactics... Its a war game, combat tactics and war games do have a synergy, Now whether you prefer infantry or armor tactics is a different debate. But when the Law follows military tactics and strategies, we roll over anything in our path. when we act like a herd of drunken cats we have a blast and lose more often.

Now could there be better tactics to use? Sure, but modern ones still do the job efficiently, and looks really cool when they are used!

[PeekaBoo I C Ju]

HEY HEY HEY!...Don't Doo Doo, on da PeekaBOO!

[Pjwned]

Encourage brawling more and you'll see more poptarts getting destroyed when a brawler goes in to close the gap.

Making pulse lasers weigh less, giving small lasers some actual range instead of needing to hump their face with it, fixing SRMs, and making crit heavy weapons like the machine gun & LBX actually be effective at what they're designed for would probably go a long way towards doing just that.

[Joseph Mallan]

Peekaboo I C JU, on 21 May 2014 - 02:01 AM, said:

HEY HEY HEY!...Don't Doo Doo, on da PeekaBOO!

I was wondering when you'd visit this thread!

[Grimmrog]

Bhael Fire, on 19 May 2014 - 01:53 PM, said:

I are confused. So...the OP is suggesting that using cover is a bad thing? Leeroy...is that you?

No, he states, that the game is to much the same, all the time, in all game modes.

[Joseph Mallan]

Grimmrog, on 21 May 2014 - 02:14 AM, said:

No, he states, that the game is to much the same, all the time, in all game modes.

Which is what many asked for when we had 2 objectives. The players wanted combat only. and by that I mean they wanted everyone to fight their way. And this thread is just more of the same. I don't wanna fight your way, you have to fight mine. Stupid.

[zortesh]

The thing is thou a brawler can close on a pop sniper and murder them, the only thing is pop sniping in infinitely easier, and closing in for a good brawl requires coordination, timing, and teamwork, its much easier to just setup on a good position and snipe.

Generally moving in a coordinated manner/ keeping formations on the move is infinitely harder, and impossible in a pug match, the death blob is the closest you get, and even then it usally falls apart if it needs to fall back or charge.