114 replies to this topic

[Toast001]

This is the way I see it from my point of view. When I am getting pounded by hundreds of lrms I fault myself for being out of position. It's not like your not given a warning or they move at incredible speed or your not given a choice of buying mods to help you lose the missile lock. I would say screen Impact needs more of a nerf then the lrms themselves. I mean do you think Isis should tell the UN to nerf American air strikes, no it's just a reality of war.

Edited by Toast001, 17 November 2014 - 07:52 AM.

[Lyoto Machida]

[Gamuray]

• Out of position... Possible, but not always the case. Could be engaged in a brawl... which still leads to the lurms, despite being where you're needed.
  
• Warning and speed... On most maps, that's enough. On some.... With Narc/Tag/UAV.... Not at all helpful.
  
• Choice of buying mods... Only if you... 1. Have the c-bills - 2. Don't find buying whole new mech better spent money - 3. Have the XP (in short, only if you have the time to grind for a few days)...
  
• Screen Impact... hm.. I could agree with that... Seeing as that's my goal when I put multiple lrm racks on anything, is to blind them while I bring my other weapons to bear...
  
• Reality of war... hmm.... Yes.. in real life. MWO can't claim "reality of war" because 1. Mech Combat Simulator (so not actual war) - 2. Video Game (not reality)

You do have a point, but only to an extent. Most of your cases are only right sometimes or for some players. (with exception to the last one.



Verdict: Plausible!

Edited by Gamuray, 17 November 2014 - 09:05 AM.

[mogs01gt]

Toast001, on 17 November 2014 - 07:50 AM, said:

This is the way I see it from my point of view. When I am getting pounded by hundreds of lrms I fault myself for being out of position. It's not like your not given a warning or they move at incredible speed or your not given a choice of buying mods to help you lose the missile lock. I would say screen Impact needs more of a nerf then the lrms themselves.

One issue I find is that when you have enemy lights locking on, using TAG or NARC, they are difficult to deal with. Most other light mechs arent spec'd to quickly take out another light and lights are a PITA to hit with lasers for the full duration. Mediums have to use a large engine to go light hunting but then expose themselves to LRM fire and no DPS to strip back armor on Heavies or Assaults.

Yes its your fault for getting caught out in the open but it's frustrating with dealing with a light mech spotting.

Either way, we run into the same fix. These maps are too small for 12v12 and the game modes are nothing more than TDM.

[Gamuray]

@Mogs

I agree with you for SOME maps. But in the case of Alpine, Terra, and Tourmaline, I think they are big enough.. but the fights only ever occur in a single, limited in size, location. (I.e. Mountain in Alpine, Ring o' Doom in Terra, Ridgeline in Tourmaline)

I'd argue more than the maps generally focus too much of their cover into a single location... Leaving flanking maneuvers or unusual fights completely vulnerable. Forest colony and Crimson Strait seem ok in terms of cover distribution. Maps like HPG however have all of it in two locations... Walls surrounding spawns and Center of the map.
And Caustic has is only at the edges except for the one ridge that is always fought over.

Edited by Gamuray, 17 November 2014 - 09:15 AM.

[Josef Nader]

If you get flushed out of cover and pounded to dust by LRMs, that's the enemy team using teamwork. Good for them.

If the enemy team is screening their LRM boats and preventing you from putting pressure on and annihilating them, that's teamwork. Good for them.

If you aren't paying attention to the missile lock warnings while brawling an enemy, that's your fault. Don't blame them.

If the guy you're brawling draws you out into the open so his fire support can tear you apart, that's teamwork. Good for them.

If a light mech NARCs you, and LRMs blot out the sun, that's teamwork. Good for them.

LRM hate is unreasonable. IDF hate is unreasonable. It's tougher to use than people are willing to admit, and dying to LRMs are almost always the fault of the person who died, or a component of the other team using superior tactics.

[KraftySOT]

This is like when women think its their fault they were date *****.


No dude its not your fault.

Avoiding LRMs are just as annoying and toxic for the game as being bombarded by 5 people with LRMs.

Imagine theres a night club thats a heck of alot of fun, but, its in a horrible part of town. You have to park in front or your running the risk of being robbed, your car broken into, or worse. Its popular so occassionally youre parking down the street. Your car gets broken into. Is this your fault? Should you beat yourself up over it? I know theres plenty of opinions on that fact. Just like there is for ****.

Without even getting into opinions on whose fault it is you got robbed.....what do you think will eventually happen to the club?

Itll go out of business, because people will eventually be turned off from going, because its just not worth it. Its not worth trying to have the fun that there is to be had, because of the negative aspect required to enjoy it.

It doesnt always happen. Sometimes you get there early enough to get a safe parking spot. But every once in a while you dont. And others dont. And someones always getting robbed. Eventually...people get tired of this, and stop going to the club, regardless of how fun it is...because they start weighing the negatives against the positives and decide its not worth it, they can go to the club that isnt as fun, that doesnt have a chance of being robbed or injured.

Its human nature to take the path of least resistance. So you have people who dont even blame the criminal for the act...they blame themselves or the patron who parked in the dark, down the road. They blame the venue/club, and it dries up and closes.

LRMs are the same thing. Human nature being what it is, people will use them to ruin your fun. And when that happens, theres a plethora of opinions that ensue, which may or may not be valid...but the fact is that EVENTUALLY regardless of if you think its your fault, the LRMers fault, PGIs fault, human natures fault, that people will stop showing up to have the fun thats being provided, because of the drawbacks to that fun that comes with the package.

[Joseph Mallan]

KraftySOT, on 17 November 2014 - 09:22 AM, said:

This is like when women think its their fault they were date *****.


No dude its not your fault.

Avoiding LRMs are just as annoying and toxic for the game as being bombarded by 5 people with LRMs.

Imagine theres a night club thats a heck of alot of fun, but, its in a horrible part of town. You have to park in front or your running the risk of being robbed, your car broken into, or worse. Its popular so occassionally youre parking down the street. Your car gets broken into. Is this your fault? Should you beat yourself up over it? I know theres plenty of opinions on that fact. Just like there is for ****.

Without even getting into opinions on whose fault it is you got robbed.....what do you think will eventually happen to the club?

Itll go out of business, because people will eventually be turned off from going, because its just not worth it. Its not worth trying to have the fun that there is to be had, because of the negative aspect required to enjoy it.

It doesnt always happen. Sometimes you get there early enough to get a safe parking spot. But every once in a while you dont. And others dont. And someones always getting robbed. Eventually...people get tired of this, and stop going to the club, regardless of how fun it is...because they start weighing the negatives against the positives and decide its not worth it, they can go to the club that isnt as fun, that doesnt have a chance of being robbed or injured.

Its human nature to take the path of least resistance. So you have people who dont even blame the criminal for the act...they blame themselves or the patron who parked in the dark, down the road. They blame the venue/club, and it dries up and closes.

LRMs are the same thing. Human nature being what it is, people will use them to ruin your fun. And when that happens, theres a plethora of opinions that ensue, which may or may not be valid...but the fact is that EVENTUALLY regardless of if you think its your fault, the LRMers fault, PGIs fault, human natures fault, that people will stop showing up to have the fun thats being provided, because of the drawbacks to that fun that comes with the package.

Dude. Its your fault your car was broken into if you know the area is less than reputable and you still go. You took the risk, you KNEW the risks. You have only yourself to blame!

We have a Bar/Club locally that had a murder in the parking lot. Guess which Bar/club I NEVER go to now?

[DasSibby]

The debate is essentially this.

1. LRM's create tactics. You can't charge across a map and not expect to get hit.

Or....

2. This game shouldn't be hide-n-seek until the LRM boats run out of ammo. (Fix indirect fire! Fix this, fix that! Etc...)


Pick your side. I admit I hate hiding, and want more armored cavalry/Tank style battles rather than the current World War I style warfare we currently have.

[MoonUnitBeta]

I'm happy that you think when I narc you, it's your fault.
Gatta hug that cover 24/7, otherwise it's your fault.
Keep out of LOS all the time, otherwise it's your fault.
If you engage the enemy before anyone else, it's your fault.

By the sounds of it, just dropping into the game is your fault. So best not to do that either.

But in truth, sometimes it's not your fault. There comes a point where you encounter situations that are not in your control. Blaming yourself for that doesn't actually help you at that point, and actually can cause you to perform worse.by hiding all the time while your team is out there doing damage.
But hey, I guess you should have known better than to stand there. I guess. I dunno. lol.

Fight fire with fire and be an LRM boat yourself? I dunno.

Edited by MoonUnitBeta, 17 November 2014 - 12:32 PM.

[Molossian Dog]

You shouldn´t drink&drive anyways.

[Choppah]

Indirect fire is unfun because there is nothing you can do to counter it except to hide. Hiding breaks LOS to prevent being targeted, and provides cover from LRMs. Unless you happen to be on a map with notoriously bad cover spots or aren't near any of the good ones. You know the spots, where LRMs can still hit you even when you are face hugging cover that is taller than your mech. So what is the solution? Always hang around the spots you know will provide LRM cover? Not really an option, unless you really enjoy camping and not helping your team when they move on.

I have mentioned this before, but I will say it again. If you want to see how indirect fire can ruin a game, go watch a high tier WOT match. With SPGs in the match, players will make completly different choices about positioning and manuvering than when there are none. They will hug cover until the match is almost over sometimes. It devolves into a gigantic stalemate until SPGs run out of ammo, or one side has killed most of the enemy tanks that the SPGs no longer have spotters and are chased down and destroyed. Sound familiar? It should because that was this weekend in MWO. Either wait for the LRM boats to run out of ammo so you can move, or hope your team can kill enough enemy mechs that the LRM boats can't maintain locks long enough to change the tide of battle. So, unless you think hiding is fun, MWO indirect fire is an unfun game mechanic that needs to be redone.

Edited by Choppah, 17 November 2014 - 09:44 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

DasSibby, on 17 November 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

The debate is essentially this.

1. LRM's create tactics. You can't charge across a map and not expect to get hit.

Or....

2. This game shouldn't be hide-n-seek until the LRM boats run out of ammo. (Fix indirect fire! Fix this, fix that! Etc...)


Pick your side. I admit I hate hiding, and want more armored cavalry/Tank style battles rather than the current World War I style warfare we currently have.

You do know most of the battle in the fiction were influenced by historical battles from around the world and throughout history right?

[KraftySOT]

Joseph Mallan, on 17 November 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

Dude. Its your fault your car was broken into if you know the area is less than reputable and you still go. You took the risk, you KNEW the risks. You have only yourself to blame!

We have a Bar/Club locally that had a murder in the parking lot. Guess which Bar/club I NEVER go to now?

Thats just as valid as the people who say "Well no the fault is the person who cant respect others enough not to rob them" and itll just keep going back and forth between the schools of thought.

But you hit hte nail on the head. Guess who doesnt go to those clubs? Anyone else either.

The point isnt "whose fault it is" its that it happening, is slowing causing people to not show up anymore.

At some point down the road, the club will close.

Joseph Mallan, on 17 November 2014 - 09:43 AM, said:

You do know most of the battle in the fiction were influenced by historical battles from around the world and throughout history right?

And mostly theyre from the mounted era of the Holy Roman Empire and such. Starting around the Hundred Years war, and ending around the Windward Years of American Colonization.

With a bit of Bagration and Ost Front thrown in, and of course the name sakes of just about every important person were "ripped from the headlines" of 1890-1918.

Kerensky was the white general leading the Czars men and Cossacks against Lenin, Trotsky and the Reds.

[Fut]

Choppah, on 17 November 2014 - 09:41 AM, said:

You know the spots, where LRMs can still hit you even when you are face hugging cover that is taller than your mech. So what is the solution? Always hang around the spots you know will provide LRM cover? Not really an option, unless you really enjoy camping and not helping your team when they move on.

Here's a tip - if you're hiding in cover and have no sight line to anything but your cover, you're doing it wrong.

One way to help with avoiding LRMs is to actually look up into the sky and watch the stream of missiles coming towards you. This will help you determine which direction to move to best avoid them (or how to move to make them impact near by objects).

Seriously, cowering in fear with you head in the sand is always a horrible idea.

Edited by Fut, 17 November 2014 - 09:53 AM.

[KraftySOT]

The "Exodus" in BTech for instance is based on Kerensky's march from Moscow to Khiva. (modern day Afghanistan) with the White forces in tow.

[Josef Nader]

Again, folks are way too mad about IDF. Why is it worse that an LRM boat is doing it when a gauss rifle, ERPPC, AC5s or even AC2 does the same job, but better? You need to spend the bulk of the match in cover any way. If you aren't, you're getting blasted to pieces by long range snipers and fire support. If you're trying to advance your way across the open, you're going to get pounded into pieces by people with frontloaded, long range damage builds, or trapped in the AC2/UAC5/AC5 earthquake machine and incapable of firing back effectively anyway, especially because they'll have cover and you won't.

If you engage an enemy brawler in the open, you're lunchmeat for the enemy team's snipers and direct fire support. Just because you -can- theoretically shoot back at them doesn't mean:

1) You are capable of engaging at the same ranges they are
2) You can disengage from the mech currently grinding your face into a salad to do so
3) Your teammates have a line of fire to shoot back at the snipers pounding on you
4) You cannot be engaged by multiple enemy mechs at the same time
5) The enemy team needs to expose themselves any more than they did with LRMs

Plus, snipers and direct fire support tend to lay on much more effective damage than LRMs. Sure, that LRM50 might look intimidating, but it's gonna strip ~30 points of armor off of the entirety of your mech, whereas the twin gauss Jäger squatting behind the hill half a klick back is gonna put 30 damage into a single location, something far more crippling.

LRM hate is demonstrably wrong. LRMs are directly inferior to sniping weapons and direct fire support. You would not have stood any more chance if the enemy mech had to peek a tiny portion of his mech out from behind a rock to shoot you, and you would still be screwed if you disengaged cover and tried to charge across the open. Not having LRMs doesn't change the nature of the game at all. Trust me. LRMs were terrible for most of CB, and things were still the same. People hid behind cover and took pot shots at each other with gauss rifles. Teams that tried to cross open spaces got annihilated. Engaging an enemy brawler outside of cover was suicide, as you'd be fighting a 4v1, and you likely couldn't shoot back at the bulk of the mechs fighting you.

It's the nature of this game. Deal with it.

Edited by Josef Nader, 17 November 2014 - 09:57 AM.

[Styxx42]

IMO I see this as a no win for either side of this argument.
Both points of view have merit.

And I have had my share of the LRM QQ occasionally.

Some times I am out of place. I recall getting suckered by a firestarter, I chased him around a protective knoll and right into Tag central. It was a beautiful tactic. And I swallowed it up hook line and sinker. Made me go DAM that was nice as I watch from the death screen.

Other times it is just bad luck/tactics/team play.
.
But if the game can limit the number of assaults then perhaps later on we can get a metric that evaluates the load outs and limits the Rain of Death scenario we see every once in a while.

Perhaps this new Bog map will allow the trees to stop the launching and hit of LRMs and add a different tactic and thought process to mech loadouts to account for that map in the future.


It is a lot of fun for a light to find a Cat in the back that can't defend it's self. So tasty when that happens.

Cheers and good mech hunting.

[Apnu]

mogs01gt, on 17 November 2014 - 09:07 AM, said:

Yes its your fault for getting caught out in the open but it's frustrating with dealing with a light mech spotting.

By this, I conclude, that Role Warfare has made an appearance in the match. Yippie!

[Darkslicer]

The damage of LRMs isn't the problem, it's the very non-skillbased gameplay and ability to indirectly tag every enemy for assists that comes with it. The events in particular are catered to LRM boats, and one really can't say otherwise as most of the people playing in the past event were trying to avoid getting kills because it would have hurt their scoring considerably. Players with LRMs can just sit about 1000m back from the action, stand still, get reliable damage and assists on enemies with minimal effort, and then cut off said damage once an enemy's close to death so someone else could pick off the kill. It's very cheesy and the mechanics really should be reworked in some way.