Jump to content

Russ Says He'll Try To Make Rewarding Ams Use A Top Priority


29 replies to this topic

#21 Mystere

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 22,783 posts
  • LocationClassified

Posted 27 January 2016 - 12:15 PM

View Postsycocys, on 27 January 2016 - 12:04 PM, said:

Unless they plan on making more awesome maps like Polar - ams will still mostly be useless.

A lot of that is because radar derp still exists and doesn't take any tonnage or crits to use, breaking LOS is pretty easy on most maps.


PGI can always slightly change UAVs such that, instead of just going up, they can travel to a grid location before staying put there. A well-vectored UAV would do wonders.

#22 mogs01gt

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • 4,292 posts
  • LocationOhio

Posted 27 January 2016 - 12:17 PM

View PostMonkey Lover, on 27 January 2016 - 11:39 AM, said:

If people start using them like crazy maybe we can get an artemis buff so LOS lrms will be worth using and non los lrms will be "better than nothing" .

lmao buffs?? Since when does PGI buff any? They'll just quirk the hell out of LRM boats and they will still be useless.

#23 DAYLEET

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 4,316 posts
  • LocationLinoleum.

Posted 27 January 2016 - 12:18 PM


Quote

Russ Says He'll Try To Make Rewarding Ams Use A Top Priority



I hope they take their time to properly implement a single bonus to a single action(shooting down missiles). It can't be easy, we will need many play test servers, many meeting and many discussion on the forum. we can't halfass a single bonus for a single action, it must be done properly, tweaking it after would be hell and would requires many months of hard work. I sure hope they don't kneejerk it into the game and break the economy.

Edited by DAYLEET, 27 January 2016 - 12:21 PM.


#24 Irishtoker

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • FP Veteran - Beta 2
  • 102 posts
  • LocationIn a hole at the bottom of the Nexus.

Posted 27 January 2016 - 12:24 PM

Just add bonuses like: "Protected with AMS", triggered when you're equipment protects an ally from an entire volley (or the majority at the least.)

It can count for one match score and a minimal amount of C-bills.

We can figure it out. We have the Science!

#25 TercieI

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 8,160 posts
  • LocationThe Far Country

Posted 27 January 2016 - 12:26 PM

Incentivizing subpar load outs. Swell.

#26 Revis Volek

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • The 1 Percent
  • 7,247 posts
  • Google+: Link
  • Facebook: Link
  • LocationBack in the Pilots chair

Posted 27 January 2016 - 12:29 PM

View Postmogs01gt, on 27 January 2016 - 12:17 PM, said:

lmao buffs?? Since when does PGI buff any? They'll just quirk the hell out of LRM boats and they will still be useless.




a quirks is a buff for the most part...unless its negative. Be it to a weapons or a chassis.

Semantics, i know its hard. Posted Image

#27 Not A Real RAbbi

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • Survivor
  • 1,688 posts
  • LocationDeath to Aladeen Cafe

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:04 PM

So, AMS is totez PASSIVE. Not sure I like the idea of throwing bonuses at it. Most obvious existing bonus is the reduction in damage to one's mech, and one's teammates's mechs, for an entirely MechLab effort. That's not enough? It USED to be.

Personal counter-LRM tactics are a solid companion to AMS, to seriously reduce the effectiveness of incoming missiles.

Maybe some bonus for AMS shooting down SRM/SSRM missiles fired at friendlies? Okay. Anything else is pretty much rewarding laziness.

I run a lot of AMS lately. Doesn't make me a f***ing hero.

#28 Felicitatem Parco

    Professor of Memetics

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Legendary Founder
  • Legendary Founder
  • 13,522 posts
  • LocationIs Being Obscured By ECM

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:34 PM

View PostTheRAbbi, on 27 January 2016 - 02:04 PM, said:

So, AMS is totez PASSIVE. Not sure I like the idea of throwing bonuses at it. Most obvious existing bonus is the reduction in damage to one's mech, and one's teammates's mechs, for an entirely MechLab effort. That's not enough? It USED to be.

Personal counter-LRM tactics are a solid companion to AMS, to seriously reduce the effectiveness of incoming missiles.

Maybe some bonus for AMS shooting down SRM/SSRM missiles fired at friendlies? Okay. Anything else is pretty much rewarding laziness.

I run a lot of AMS lately. Doesn't make me a f***ing hero.


Several of the current rewards are passive. ECM protection, counter ECM, Lance formation, etc. They just require you to be close to someone...

Which is probably the point. Teammates who work closely together survive well, and they may be trying to encourage the mentality that sticking to your team keeps your team in good shape.

#29 InspectorG

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Boombox
  • The Boombox
  • 4,469 posts
  • LocationCleveland, Ohio

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:42 PM

View Postmogs01gt, on 27 January 2016 - 11:34 AM, said:

lol this will make LRMs even more worthless!


EEERRRR MMMEEEERRRRR GGGEEERRRRDDDDD

Rewards for AMS???

Why not reward better play? Honestly, this should be a Tutorial Module, not a reward.

This is basically rewarding newb/bad players for using a crutch that WILL NOT hold them up once they get to T3.

I would rather PGI give Radar derp users a bonus. FAR more beneficial to a team.

There is no AMS for direct fire guns/beams. Sooner players learn this, sooner they git gud.

#30 LordNothing

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 17,072 posts

Posted 27 January 2016 - 02:42 PM

if i get paid for using it i might equip it. i can usually get out of lerms pretty quickly and never felt the need for it. you might see people running iron dome (ams boats) mechs again.

Edited by LordNothing, 27 January 2016 - 02:45 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users