In my (somewhat limited) experience, there is a major distinction to be made between the players and their methods, and the weapon system itself. Others have said the same earlier in the thread, and elsewhere, but perhaps it bears repeating.
LRMs as a weapon system is an entirely valid choice. They have a fear factor (missile alert) and offer utility not found in any other weapon (indirect fire). Much like streaks, their target lock allows people to hit difficult targets.
Properly used, they are a perfectly good weapon, just like any other.
So, the real problem is the players. Poor teamwork, bad tactics, selfish play, steep learning curve to master, these are all problems that are far from exclusive to LRM users, though I will admit that LRM use seems to lend itself to these problems. But, hate the player, not the game (heh).
That said, as the OP has repeatedly pointed out,
constructive criticism is far more healthy for all concerned in the long run.
Long version follows, impatient readers need not bother.
1. Expecting your team to serve you, indeed, nagging them to do so by providing you with locks &/or UAVs, is selfish. Locking your target should
always be a standard method (refusing to get locks for any reason is unwise if done out of ignorance, and downright childish and stupid if done out of spite &/or LRM hate), but LRM users should be able and willing to go out and get their own locks (the mech I currently use the most LRMs on has TAG, and I move up with the team).
2. Not bearing your share of the damage load is a big issue, and while it may not be exclusive to missile users (it isn't) it undeniably appears more with LRMs. If a LRMer, or a sniper, as the OP so correctly points out, sits back and fails to take some damage for the team, then that is helping the enemy win more effectively. If you haven't looked already, check the tactics 101 comic thread,
https://mwomercs.com...ics-101-comics/ , there is one strip that specifically points out the obvious folly of allowing the enemy to focus their damage on one mech at a time. The solution here seems to be, as the OP and others have said, for the LRM users to move up and be more involved (directly) in the fight, taking some of the damage.
3. Failure to recognize missed shots. I think that many players are not fully aware that if they hit, their cross hairs turns red. This is not a fault of the LRM, it is a fault of a player. No reason to hate just LRM users here.
4. Then there is the common complaint of "it's easy mode". This argument always puzzles me. If it is so easy, that suggests it is also simple to be very effective. If it is effective, why hate it? If it isn't effective, then it clearly isn't all that easy, and moreover, people wouldn't bother with it. I suspect that the venom here is three-fold.
One, people despise being hit when they can't return fire. Victims of LRMs feel powerless in a way that no other weapon can't quite manage; even if you have LRMs yourself you might not be able to return fire (lacking a spotter?). So people hate the weapon, even though it is not truly at fault for the situation.
Two, there is little impetus for LRM users to actually improve their aiming and gameplay. A valid concern, but self correcting if true. Hypothetically,
if dedicated LRM players, on average, are less skilled then they will not end up playing at higher tiers, and if others, with "better" methods, improve to those tiers, then they won't have to deal with the LRM users any longer. No problem.
Three, LRMs are easily countered, thus players who rely on them are playing badly and dragging the team down. Suspect logic. Counters: hide, be under cover, ECM, shutting down. 3/4 of that list are effective against other weapons as well, at least to some degree. A skilled &/or well equipped LRM player will remain effective even in the face of those counters, just as, e.g., a skilled brawler remains effective against a tough opponent.
I suspect the real trouble is that LRMs start off very effective, requiring little skill, but quickly lose their value as opponents become more wily. Mastering LRMs to remain effective with them has a VERY steep learning curve, most people struggle and switch to other weapons, so few people can be competitive with LRMs. Again, not a weapon problem, a player problem.
Modern (as in real world) combined arms methods make use of a variety of weapon systems to be more effective on the battlefield than any single system would be. In MWO, LRM's have their place in that, as supporting fire platforms. Supporting fire is a role, or method, not simply a weapon system, LRMs lend themselves to that role, as do sniper methods/weapons. Skilled players, or rather,
teams, will find a balance and adapt to use whatever weapons are available to them, throwing an entire weapon system out with the trash is foolish, particularly when that system offers an advantage no other weapon does, in this case, indirect fire. Indirect fire is a tried and true method in real world battle, and it also applies to MWO, like it or not. Too much support and you have an ineffective team. Too little support will also be a different problem.
12
Tesunie, on 06 December 2016 - 05:56 PM, said:
) I keep my range dynamic, and I'll even brawl when it's advantageous.
