Jack Shayu Walker, on 15 July 2015 - 07:46 PM, said:
I get what you are saying, but suppose my team doesn't bring enough AMS, and I get targeted as the first man up to be bombarded by the entire enemy teams LRMs. There's nothing i can do but desperately scream and look for tall cover while simultaneously trying to find the guy who's spotting me. An entire teams worth of LRMs will make short work of me, and I didn't really have a chance to react intelligently or have any fun.
The potential for this to happen more than once in a blue moon is what worries me about removing ECMs stealth capabilities. i understand that you don't boat LRMs, but I hope you can understand where I'm coming from too. I like having a fighting chance when the whole enemy team decides they want me dead.
You see, I disagree with that. It can happen sometimes, sure. But typically, you should be able to break lock from the spotter, and get into cover.
Also, "if my team doesn't bring any AMS" is no different than from the current "if no one on my team brings ECM". It's also like saying "if I run around behind the enemy team alone, and they all turn and focus me to death, we should prevent that". It's a teamwork game. AMS is a teamwork protection piece of gear. Currently, it's not taken in favor of ECM. Why take AMS which is a soft counter to LRMs, when you can just take ECM for about the same cost, and be a hard counter?
Still, until LRMs are seen as often as all other weapons, I feel they need help. Adjusting the counters to LRMs is a start. I'm not opposed to other mechanics, but LRMs do need to keep their indirect fire capabilities. They add tactical considerations into the game play. (And reminder, they are the slowest movement weapon in the game.)
The problem with LRMs (and most people's mentality, and with most other weapons in the game) is the concept that boating them makes them better. Though, this is true to an extent, every weapon system should also be balanced in a manner where even if they aren't boated, they should remain affective. Right now, LRMs are a "boat or go home" weapon (even if I don't play them that way) due to all the counters to them, if they are even taken at all.
I think I'm rambling here, and probably not making as much sense as I'd like to anymore... However, suffice to say, I see your point. I agree with some of what you've been saying. However, LRMs do need their indirect capabilities. I view LRMs as a utility weapon. Not always "effective" for every role, but good for many things.
(One proposal for indirectly fired LRMs would be an increase to their spread. I could get behind that far sooner than no lock unless it's direct or done with X gear.)