387 replies to this topic

[Tatula]

Last night in a PUG drop, one LRM player on my team types a simple request: "Hold Locks Please". It's a simple enough request, and not that uncommon. However, another player types "How about getting your own locks?", which leads to the LRM player to respond if the second player would like him to leave the match. The second player responds "Yes, please", and the LRM player complied. We already have one D/C, so now we're down 2 players.

Now I don't play LRMs very often, but I do it once in a while just to mix things up. I no longer remind the team to hold locks precisely due to that attitude towards LRM players. I admit I have seen some bad LRM players who just sit way back waiting for his teams to lock targets for them, but I've also seen good LRM players who are very effective in providing fire support and keeping the enemy pinned with LRMs. I feel that this hostility towards LRM players is unjustified and foolish. I would rather have a bad LRM player than playing the match short one player. At the very least he'll serve as canon fodder and absorb some damage, and maybe even strip off a few points of armor off an enemy.

Honestly, if you dislike LRM as a weapon system, then don't use it, but to tell your own team mate to leave the match is a disservice to your own team.

[Mcgral18]

Aloha, on 29 May 2015 - 10:54 AM, said:

Honestly, if you dislike LRM as a weapon system, then don't use it, but to tell your own team mate to leave the match is a disservice to your own team.

Having a LRM centric build is already being down a useful player.

They are terribly inefficient weapons that are so easy to completely neuter.


They often can't keep up with the deathball, and I'm not about to kill myself trying to support him, while he can't even damage the enemy.
Down a player, without saying a single thing.


I won't insult them when asking for locks; I'll just ignore them. I lock targets when I shoot them. I will not not get locks out of spite, but I won't stop torso twisting so he can pad his stats with useless damage.

They are generally a waste of a player slot.

[GRiPSViGiL]

Mcgral18, on 29 May 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

They are generally a waste of a player slot.

Wut he said.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

That kind of stuff sucks, but LRMs are also not in a good place right now either.


Yeah, we can have the stars align and a get high damage with kills here and there when boated (and boating is made worse with multiple boaters), but LRMs are still rather inefficient and have too many hard counters due to how locks currently work.

I'm afraid we're gonna be stuck with this situation,
and I'd love to explore alternatives, such as simply having missiles be ripple fired, following the crosshair / reticle and have extra gear like Artemis and NARC increase missile response speed to moving the crosshair / reticle around, instead of our current implementation.

[Shredhead]

Aloha, on 29 May 2015 - 10:54 AM, said:

Last night in a PUG drop, one LRM player on my team types a simple request: "Hold Locks Please". It's a simple enough request, and not that uncommon. However, another player types "How about getting your own locks?", which leads to the LRM player to respond if the second player would like him to leave the match. The second player responds "Yes, please", and the LRM player complied. We already have one D/C, so now we're down 2 players.

Now I don't play LRMs very often, but I do it once in a while just to mix things up. I no longer remind the team to hold locks precisely due to that attitude towards LRM players. I admit I have seen some bad LRM players who just sit way back waiting for his teams to lock targets for them, but I've also seen good LRM players who are very effective in providing fire support and keeping the enemy pinned with LRMs. I feel that this hostility towards LRM players is unjustified and foolish. I would rather have a bad LRM player than playing the match short one player. At the very least he'll serve as canon fodder and absorb some damage, and maybe even strip off a few points of armor off an enemy.

Honestly, if you dislike LRM as a weapon system, then don't use it, but to tell your own team mate to leave the match is a disservice to your own team.

"LRMs here hold locks" is the sign of a bad player. It is not my duty to hold any locks, I do what I have to do to stay alive and kill the enemy. This does not involve running after mechs that might lead me into a bad position, this does not involve to hold a lock on a minor threat if an even bigger one appears in my sights and it most certainly not involves for me to risk my arse while you sit far away from the action so your precious paintjob doesn't get scratched!
Your place as a LRM boat is 100 meters behind the line and your task is to get your own freaking locks!
Deal with it!

[Zeusus]

Well first off the guy shouldn't have actually disconnected, that was a disservice. Ignore the fool telling him to disco. Use what weapons you want, of you aren't doing competitive it doesn't matter.

Secondly If you are packing LRMs you shouldn't require locks from us as you should be in the pack and able to get your own, not hanging out in the back. Which ties into my next point well.

Thirdly I know I get annoyed by LRM boats complaining about me not holding locks. If I am not it is because I can't see the enemy, I'm not gonna suicide for you. If I am holding a lock I am brawling. Get over here and back me up, I'll be your meat shield but you should be no more than 300m from the enemy. Otherwise you are wasting ammo.

[Dolph Hoskins]

Aloha, on 29 May 2015 - 10:54 AM, said:

Last night in a PUG drop, one LRM player on my team types a simple request: "Hold Locks Please". It's a simple enough request, and not that uncommon. However, another player types "How about getting your own locks?", which leads to the LRM player to respond if the second player would like him to leave the match. The second player responds "Yes, please", and the LRM player complied. We already have one D/C, so now we're down 2 players.

Honestly, if you dislike LRM as a weapon system, then don't use it, but to tell your own team mate to leave the match is a disservice to your own team.

Just to respond to this point and the bold part.

Player 2 did not tell the other player to leave from what I read. The LRM player threatened his entire team that he would leave just because the other guy had some words for him, and player 2 was pretty much like, "screw you go ahead and leave" which actually should have been the census of the team at that point. Threaten to leave? Then GTFO.

Sounds to me like the LRM player threw a little kid hissy fit and made everyone else suffer for it. Place blame where blame is due.

That is all, good day.

[FupDup]

In general, people in this game and most other games have a habit of blaming the players for using or not using certain mechanics, rather than blaming the game itself for being designed that way in the first place. It's sort of like blaming the gun instead of the shooter, more or less.

[Gut]

Lrms need to be really powerful and about a thousand times more skill based. The lrmer should not be able to lock on, but rather have an arc of fire where the Lrms will hit on their hud. This, if they did good damage, would be acceptable

[Joseph Mallan]

FupDup, on 29 May 2015 - 11:11 AM, said:

In general, people in this game and most other games have a habit of blaming the players for using or not using certain mechanics, rather than blaming the game itself for being designed that way in the first place. It's sort of like blaming the gun instead of the shooter, more or less.

Very true. Guns normally don't fire unless someone is handling it.

Also the problem with LRMs is when they are made more powerful players whine cause they don't like LRMs cause it takes away from their level of skillz.

So basically whining cause it is not teh way they want to fight.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 29 May 2015 - 11:14 AM.

[Deathlike]

All I can say is..

The last time I told an LRM user to move up a closer to the team, I was roundly ignored (his response what "I know what I'm doing"), and that guy proceeded to do virtually nothing.... in a CW match no less.


While I have great disdain for LRMs, I would like to hope LRM-bound players at least maximize their effectiveness as much as they can w/o requiring other teammates to be their crutch when they cannot get the locks themselves.

The only mech that should remotely get an exception is the Catapult-A1... the rest honestly does not have an excuse to bring their own TAG.

Edited by Deathlike, 29 May 2015 - 11:15 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Mcgral18, on 29 May 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

They are generally a waste of a player slot.

Technically, 90% of the playerbase is, regardless of if they pack LRMs or not. So why not ask all those people who can barely break 100 dmg in their Dire Wolves to disconnect, too?

LRMs might not work well in concentrated Team Play with competent players, but this is the PUG queue we are talking about. Where LRMs CAN be effective. I think you would rather have me drop on your team with my HBK-4J than some schmuck in a DakkaWolf that won't get 200 damage?

And that's why I don't paint any single build, mech or weapon system as "bad" because in solo play, a lot of what the Comps call bad, can be perfectly viable.

Gut, on 29 May 2015 - 11:11 AM, said:

Lrms need to be really powerful and about a thousand times more skill based. The lrmer should not be able to lock on, but rather have an arc of fire where the Lrms will hit on their hud. This, if they did good damage, would be acceptable

and to do that they would need to be about 10x faster projectile speed to be worth anything at all, considering the relative speeds of ballistcs and lasers.

[Gut]

Not too much faster, but hit hard enough to be worth it. Like I said, skill based.

[Tatula]

I agreed that the LRM player threw a prissy fit and left the match, leaving the team at a disadvantage. It's just unfortunate that the situation has come to this.

[Astrocanis]

Gut, on 29 May 2015 - 11:11 AM, said:

Lrms need to be really powerful and about a thousand times more skill based. The lrmer should not be able to lock on, but rather have an arc of fire where the Lrms will hit on their hud. This, if they did good damage, would be acceptable

In pug queue last night ,I had two kills: one on a whale and one on a Catapult where I could not get a lock due to ECM. The whale was a pure direct fire LRM5 kill (KTO-18) and the second was direct fire LRM5 and 2xMPL. Both in Frozen City, different games.

I average around 600 damage and 2 kills per game on my Kintaro. I NEVER ask for locks because my other douchemates will give me nothing but crap as I outmaneuver, outdamage and outkill most of them. CW is a different beast, mostly because of hide-and-peek map design.

The problem with LRM boats is they think of themselves as missile turrets. My KTO does 89kph and I run with the lights a lot.

[edit] I disagree with changing LRM mechanics much. Those that are willing to adapt from doh-stand-back-and-shoot-da-stuffs to a mobile artillery platform whose primary missions are cockpit shake (love to keep my lights whole) and fire suppression will succeed with them the way they are.

Edited by Astrocanis, 29 May 2015 - 11:30 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Gut, on 29 May 2015 - 11:25 AM, said:

Not too much faster, but hit hard enough to be worth it. Like I said, skill based.

if they don't move significantly faster, the only things you would ever hit at any kind of range, are campers and shut down mechs, no matter your skill. LRMs have a projectile speed of 160 m/s. the next slowest non missile is the AC20, at 650 m/s, or 4x that speed, on a dedicated short range gun. LRMs are supposed to be Long Range Weapons, that are already outranged by various large lasers and autocannon. Without significant projectile speed, or some form of lock on mechanism, they would be utterly useless as long range weapons.

[MechWarrior3671771]

"Having a LRM centric build is already being down a useful player. They are terribly inefficient weapons that are so easy to completely neuter."

I keep hearing this, but when I do AMS checks with my LRM5, all the big boys dive for cover. Or they get focused down quicker because they play less aggressively when hearing "incoming missile" every 5 secs. Sure, LRMs are subpar blah blah and good players know how to blah blah. Guess what? Most of the player base isn't that good... apparently. So please knock it off with the LRM bias.

[Astrocanis]

Bishop Steiner, on 29 May 2015 - 11:29 AM, said:

if they don't move significantly faster, the only things you would ever hit at any kind of range, are campers and shut down mechs, no matter your skill. LRMs have a projectile speed of 160 m/s. the next slowest non missile is the AC20, at 650 m/s, or 4x that speed, on a dedicated short range gun. LRMs are supposed to be Long Range Weapons, that are already outranged by various large lasers and autocannon. Without significant projectile speed, or some form of lock on mechanism, they would be utterly useless as long range weapons.

This I do agree with. If only direct fire is supported, they are entirely useless. They are situationally useful without locks. Nothing more.

[masCh]

Mcgral18, on 29 May 2015 - 10:58 AM, said:

so he can pad his stats with useless damage.

They are generally a waste of a player slot.

Quote

Yeah, we can have the stars align and a get high damage with kills here and there when boated (and boating is made worse with multiple boaters), but LRMs are still rather inefficient and have too many hard counters due to how locks currently work.

Quote

Otherwise you are wasting ammo

Quote

The only mech that should remotely get an exception is the Catapult-A1... the rest honestly does not have an excuse to bring their own TAG.

All these comments are hilarious.

If you call the LRM carrier a waste of a slot, how do you make of games like these when the LRM Catapult got more than half the kills for the team and turned the match around from losing to winning?

[Yokaiko]

Aloha, on 29 May 2015 - 10:54 AM, said:

Last night in a PUG drop, one LRM player on my team types a simple request: "Hold Locks Please". It's a simple enough request, and not that uncommon. However, another player types "How about getting your own locks?", which leads to the LRM player to respond if the second player would like him to leave the match. The second player responds "Yes, please", and the LRM player complied. We already have one D/C, so now we're down 2 players.

Now I don't play LRMs very often, but I do it once in a while just to mix things up. I no longer remind the team to hold locks precisely due to that attitude towards LRM players. I admit I have seen some bad LRM players who just sit way back waiting for his teams to lock targets for them, but I've also seen good LRM players who are very effective in providing fire support and keeping the enemy pinned with LRMs. I feel that this hostility towards LRM players is unjustified and foolish. I would rather have a bad LRM player than playing the match short one player. At the very least he'll serve as canon fodder and absorb some damage, and maybe even strip off a few points of armor off an enemy.

Honestly, if you dislike LRM as a weapon system, then don't use it, but to tell your own team mate to leave the match is a disservice to your own team.

Because we have ALL had games where it looked like we were up three mechs.

...then realized that those three said mechs were LRM, two with no backup weapons, and one with a fresh mech that won't commit

Then you lose.