Lrms, Get Your Own Lock.
#41
Posted 04 May 2015 - 09:47 PM
#42
Posted 04 May 2015 - 09:51 PM
If you are on the receiving end of a blind-fired LRM volley (e.g. when being under ECM protection), Will the “incoming missiles” alarm / shrill go off to notify you of the threat? or will the alarm only go off when being fired upon when under active "R-key" tracking (i.e. no ECM cover)?
#45
Posted 04 May 2015 - 10:16 PM
Khobai, on 04 May 2015 - 02:59 PM, said:
1) long-range meta dominates
2) without brawling LRMs have trouble holding locks
Easiest way to fix LRMs is simply to bring back brawling... then locks get held and LRMs are more useful.
Seriously?
I don't know in which elo bracket you live in but.... I assure you that in my team I hear "PUUUUSH NOWW" after 2 minutes, and the stomp happens 2-3 later....
go figure how much lrmboats are usefull and if long range meta dominates (lol).
It's all about brawl now.
You are welcome for my tip.
#46
Posted 04 May 2015 - 10:26 PM
#48
Posted 04 May 2015 - 11:04 PM
2. You're a damned fool if you forgo locking targets just because some other player on your team carries a weapon which just happens to be entirely dependent on locking targets. You're just hamstringing yourself and the rest of your team, regardless of that person. Though information warfare in MWO is pretty bass ackward, it's still very valuable to have as much information as possible.
3. If you're trying to discourage new people, then... why? If you're trying to discourage everyone who uses LRMs, you're too late... you're already in game with that person. And if you're seeing bad LRM users, they're probably clueless enough to not even be aware of your opinion, let alone care.
Meh.
Edited by KnowBuddy, 04 May 2015 - 11:04 PM.
#49
Posted 05 May 2015 - 12:07 AM
Roadkill, on 04 May 2015 - 05:20 PM, said:
this.
this is why im usually against LRM assaults. because they're usually pugged the wrong way. while a pushing LRM heavy / assault will still do his job.
Even jman in his hunchie is always in first line risking an ammo explosion. but that's the right way to play it.
#50
Posted 05 May 2015 - 12:17 AM
Edited by tortuousGoddess, 05 May 2015 - 12:19 AM.
#51
Posted 05 May 2015 - 12:56 AM
Quote
Quote
But no one said you should refuse to lock targets in a thread titled "Get your own lock"
Hit R, move on, find a real issue to complain about outside of the struggles of not wanting to hit a button. Ya'll should know better..
#52
Posted 05 May 2015 - 03:00 AM
Do everyone a favor, lock 'em, even so if you can't, some one else can bag 'em.
#53
Posted 05 May 2015 - 03:12 AM
Khobai, on 04 May 2015 - 02:59 PM, said:
1) long-range meta dominates
2) without brawling LRMs have trouble holding locks
Easiest way to fix LRMs is simply to bring back brawling... then locks get held and LRMs are more useful.
So like an Atlas with 280 meter range weapons? And a good idea where the R key is? Yup I will always invite missile boats to the party. Cause Winning is more important than my personal stats.
#54
Posted 05 May 2015 - 03:44 AM
Joseph Mallan, on 05 May 2015 - 03:12 AM, said:
I wish this was the mentality of all the players.
But the OP (and some others) show there are still people who only play this game to pet their ego... just a shame.
#55
Posted 05 May 2015 - 03:44 AM
Quote
Any decent pilot will lock their targets constantly to get information about them. If they're not, then they're still learning and this phrase won't encourage them to change their behaviour anyway.
These whole set of "2160 missiles looking for a good home, locks pls" LRM boat mating calls at the beginning of the match are nothing more than saying "I have nothing but missiles and I will just park this baby in a ditch away from the fight. So go ahead and work for me!". I will lock my targets as usual, but I also know that we possibly have a player who will contribute minimally to the actual fight. It's discouraging.
If the owner of this sentence is in an Assault, then I find this sentence also selfish and repulsive. If you bring an Assault on the field, you are obligated to be at the frontline, intimidating the enemy and exchange hits. You are not supposed to be hiding 500m behind the frontline waiting for locks. Of course, nobody is holding you from doing that but know that it's just not the way to play an Assault.
The best locks are the locks you get on your own (due to target decay/radar derp). Embrace it and build a 'Mech with enough mobility to do that. I have nothing against LRMs or LRM boats (even I do it occasionally for fun) I just don't like people betting it all on LRMs and then expecting their team to the work for them.
Edited by Tahribator, 05 May 2015 - 03:48 AM.
#56
Posted 05 May 2015 - 03:48 AM
Tahribator, on 05 May 2015 - 03:44 AM, said:
Any decent pilot will lock their targets constantly to get information about them. If they're not, then they're still learning and this phrase encourage them lock targets anyway.
These whole set of "2160 missiles looking for a good home, locks pls" LRM boat mating calls at the beginning of the match are nothing more than saying "I have nothing but missiles and I will just park this baby in a ditch away from the fight. So go ahead and work for me!". I will lock my targets as usual, but I also know that we possibly have a player who will contribute minimally to the actual fight. It's discouraging.
If the owner of this sentence is in an Assault, then I find this sentence also selfish and repulsive. If you bring an Assault on the field, you are obligated to be at the frontline, intimidating the enemy and exchange hits. You are not supposed to be hiding 500m behind the frontline waiting for locks. Of course, nobody is holding you from doing that but know that it's just not the way to play an Assault.
The best locks are the locks you get on your own (due to target decay/radar derp). Embrace it and build a 'Mech with enough mobility to do that.
Also I am more than happy that my Fire Support is safely behind the front line so they can send help where its needed without worrying if the enemy lights can see them. There are many ways to look at the situation. Few of them are wrong.
Edited by Joseph Mallan, 05 May 2015 - 03:50 AM.
#57
Posted 05 May 2015 - 04:07 AM
And the only two reason I would ever give you locks is.
1: I'm narcing stuff in my warhawk so i can lrm things myself.
2: I need to lock stuff up so I can shoot the soft bits neways.
lrmsboats just aren't as useful to the team as .. practically any other mech...... I don't honestly know why people bother with the abundance of ecm mechs nowadays anyways... lrming stuff effectively takes so much more work and effort then just shooting stuff with directfire once you climb the elo ladder even a little bit.
Edited by zortesh, 05 May 2015 - 04:08 AM.
#58
Posted 05 May 2015 - 04:35 AM
The Super Long Range META were you get shot from behind the visual range pinpoint accurate makes it so...the Super High Alpha META were you cant stick out your Nose in a slower, bigger Mech makes it so...ah well, Quirks make it so...
I try to make something working out of the Mechs i have - bcs that is the true Spirit of a Mechwarrior game - work the best with what you have!
Its obviously a bit hard facing all these overpimped and superquirked Clan and IS Range-/Damagemonster that diesable you in 3 seconds...
Edited by Thorqemada, 05 May 2015 - 04:36 AM.
#59
Posted 05 May 2015 - 04:43 AM
zortesh, on 05 May 2015 - 04:07 AM, said:
And the only two reason I would ever give you locks is.
1: I'm narcing stuff in my warhawk so i can lrm things myself.
2: I need to lock stuff up so I can shoot the soft bits neways.
lrmsboats just aren't as useful to the team as .. practically any other mech...... I don't honestly know why people bother with the abundance of ecm mechs nowadays anyways... lrming stuff effectively takes so much more work and effort then just shooting stuff with directfire once you climb the elo ladder even a little bit.
If you are not hitting R you don't really want to win.
#60
Posted 05 May 2015 - 04:44 AM
But I freely send LRMs down range to help Mechs in heavy contact
You’re welcome
5 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 5 guests, 0 anonymous users