data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/b3ae9/b3ae9cf8cfed3e06df6984fcf2a08c460eab065d" alt=""
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/c8699/c8699cb478b143dee6ca2f6e447e9d81d7bfa4b1" alt=""
Russ Will Review The Lt. Voice Your Opinion.
#121
Posted 07 July 2016 - 05:10 AM
Tried it in beta1 and last month, etc!
I dont give a **** about CW/FP, so **** dont matter what PGI does with it to me!
PGI has not done anything to CW/FP for my tastes to wanna play it. Game is in the same state it was 4 years ago, just NEW MECHS, NEW MAPS!
Its like Taco bell . . . they just keep re wrapping the same basic **** over with a "twist" and call it something "NEW". Everyone jumps on that **** like lemmings!!!
#122
Posted 07 July 2016 - 05:37 AM
ScorpionNinja, on 07 July 2016 - 05:10 AM, said:
Tried it in beta1 and last month, etc!
I dont give a **** about CW/FP, so **** dont matter what PGI does with it to me!
PGI has not done anything to CW/FP for my tastes to wanna play it. Game is in the same state it was 4 years ago, just NEW MECHS, NEW MAPS!
Its like Taco bell . . . they just keep re wrapping the same basic **** over with a "twist" and call it something "NEW". Everyone jumps on that **** like lemmings!!!
Then why are you posting in here... go to your QP and leave CW to the people that like to play it .
OP, less bias on your poll please, it´s screaming "i only deliver shamfru dispray/I cant counter LT" over all of them interwebs .
If you guys wanna cry someone a river, goto Twitter, plsthxkbye .
Why go Twitter ?
This forum is already drowning in SaltTM and Im having a damn hard time raking it all in, so be nice, gimme and all the other saltminers out there a lil´ break .
#123
Posted 07 July 2016 - 08:51 AM
Lily from animove, on 07 July 2016 - 04:51 AM, said:
Nothing. Why should they? Combat ID and Satellite Sweep are already very powerful tools when used correctly. There doesn't need to be anything more than that.
#125
Posted 07 July 2016 - 01:02 PM
Limit the number of times it can fire, perhaps to one per match.
Keep its damage and radius the same as it is right this very second.
It's not that the Long Tom is a bad fit; it's that it fires too frequently and can be easily manipulated.
Although, if the notion is that all matches will stop once the Long Tom comes online, then kick the whole thing outta MWO.
Edited by Commander A9, 07 July 2016 - 01:03 PM.
#126
Posted 07 July 2016 - 01:06 PM
The perma sweep would be too powerful, no? All the intel, all the time... Surely better options exist?
If we come up with enough good suggestions for alternatives and changes will it matter?
Changes like slower timing, less damage/radius or maybe some scatter? Still rather it went away.
Replace it with other iwarfare concepts:
5 second, target breaking emp burst on the enemies, breaks locks and prevents new locks for duration, maybe statics out the HUD/map;
C3 UAVs that provide lock bonuses and faster info gathering dropped every few minutes;
Forced shutdowns due to some kind of clever techiness;
ECM UAVs (just dont show as doritos);
Bonus to all info gathering speeds;
Or just do things like drop pod in a couple of turrets or a BAP type sensor every few minutes.
Or change it up a bit, make all the abilities other than info gathering (which would be the first thing you'd try to find out right?) randomly chosen from a set, higher scouting percentages means more rngs for you... adds some variety and chance to very predictable matches (maybe)? Could even keep a reduced potency LT in the bag, just maybe with a lower %.
#127
Posted 07 July 2016 - 01:39 PM
Edited by Tigerwolf, 07 July 2016 - 01:42 PM.
#128
Posted 07 July 2016 - 02:00 PM
#129
Posted 07 July 2016 - 05:26 PM
You just had, literally, hundreds of players change alignment to try and fight one another. And then an event. It drew people to the game mode in a way we haven't seen.
And the result?
People are already vanishing from the game. The cries are loud and long to remove it. And still, at this point, nothing from PGI. It's incredibly frustrating. I am playing less and less. The game just doesn't offer enough for me to stay interested. If it wasn't for the PLAYER-DRIVEN leagues, like Proxis and NBT and MRBC, then I'd have no reason to be here.
I'm stunned that this is still a conversation and that nobody at PGI has stopped and been like "Man, players really hate Long Tom. Maybe we should remove it so they have more fun?"
#130
Posted 07 July 2016 - 09:27 PM
Khalcruth, on 07 July 2016 - 08:51 AM, said:
Nothing. Why should they? Combat ID and Satellite Sweep are already very powerful tools when used correctly. There doesn't need to be anything more than that.
There is no limit to what they can add in place of the LT:
-Increased rate of fire (cooldown)
-Increased running speed
-Locks last longer time
-Target information are instant
-Etc
I am sure the player base could suggest hundred other options that provide some advantage but don't caus such massive effect as the LT.
#131
Posted 08 July 2016 - 05:26 AM
I would rather see a continuation of the vision progression: Combat ID->Sensor Sweep-> Sensor Drone in each grid. The sensor drones function much like UAV's, but are persistent, and have higher HP. Would be a huge benefit to the faction that earned it, but not an insurmountable threat to the opposition. Until the drone is shot down it stays. Could cause a major lrmageddon, but at least it would still be mech v mech.
#132
Posted 08 July 2016 - 11:36 AM
Long Tom would go against all honor codes that Clans have. They would never use it, it's not an honorable weapon. They'd use contractions and promote Freebirths to Omni mechs long before they ever lowered their standards far enough to use a Long Tom in battle.
Stick to your Lore PGI. Remove it from Clan Defense.
IS can continue to use it, because we are dishonorable Freebirth scum.
Edited by Stormbringer13, 11 July 2016 - 08:08 PM.
#133
Posted 08 July 2016 - 01:01 PM
#134
Posted 08 July 2016 - 01:09 PM
nehebkau, on 07 July 2016 - 12:43 PM, said:
perma satellite sweep would be a good replacement for long-tom.
That's a horrible idea. Remember seismic sensor, pre-nerf? Now give it infinite range, apply it without a module slot, and don't even require that the targets move. No amount of scouting should make tactical maneuvering irrelevant.
#135
Posted 08 July 2016 - 01:11 PM
#136
Posted 08 July 2016 - 01:20 PM
Duncan Aravain, on 08 July 2016 - 01:01 PM, said:
Legion, huh... like what? Heat scale? Autocannon cooldowns? (if you said yes to either of those, you are officially a lore newb and should crack open Solaris VII.) Or is it ECM (see above, go read the Tactical Handbook.)
Or are we talking about some obscure novel reference? Sidebar flavor text? I'm mildly curious, since people will sometimes use the term "Lore" to refer to the game rules as well as the rather large body of contradictory fiction.
"Legion" implies that there are a lot of deviations from the lore - which isn't a suicide pact anyway - not the handful of pet peeves and "fixes" that people who complain bitterly/constantly on the subject often put up as an excuse to stamp their foot and demand to have their way on the basis that Real Fans Should Be Listened To.*
*and no one else.
#137
Posted 08 July 2016 - 01:23 PM
Edited by Void Angel, 08 July 2016 - 01:26 PM.
#138
Posted 08 July 2016 - 01:27 PM
#139
Posted 08 July 2016 - 01:48 PM
I only play Invasion so its really annoying to have a different game mode allow the enemy to have nukes. The first 2 bonuses (satelite sweep and combat ID) are comparatively un-noticeable then a huge step up to LT the rewards should have a better progression.
#140
Posted 08 July 2016 - 01:55 PM
Honestly?
Dropship flyby. On the sensor sweep the 3 dropships make a pass down the map in formation, doing their laser spam damage. That's enough damage to make a difference spread over the other team but not obliterating them. At 2 minute intervals it means every wave will have taken some torso hits before they even get to the gate.
This is significant without being OP. It's doable with existing mechanics and triggers. As a solution it's a pretty easy one.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users