Xetelian, on 21 March 2017 - 10:54 PM, said:
Does this need to be a thread? You can't honestly believe there is grounds for reporting someone for not hitting R, can you?
I hit R when I need to see where to shoot, I don't go out of my way to keep a lock unless I'm using Tag.
If this offends you because you want to LRM and think everyone needs to cater to you then so be it.
Apparently... yes? Though originally this was a discussion in a separate thread, and I was content to just leave it there as a thought. Someone asked me if I was willing for it to be a thread to try and expand on the topic, and I felt no reason to say no.
The concept here isn't reporting or punishing someone for not getting locks. That could never be a thing and I realize that. It would be just kinda dumb to even try. "Is that person intentionally not getting locks, just doesn't realize how to get locks, or is hunting a different target and doesn't want to change locks?" Intention behind the action is very hard (read as nearly impossible) to tell unless you are that person (as then you know you intent).
As an LRM user (for the record I never boat), I actually don't expect you to get and hold locks. I expect you to fight as best you can, and that you are going to duck and dodge as much as you can. AKA: Hold a lock if you can, but if doing so would kill you it isn't worth it. You are worth more to the team active and still dealing damage than destroyed for me to get one more volley on target.
I'll also mention, I don't LRM indirectly only ~900m away. I'm in the opponents faces and often the forward most mech on my team. (Don't ask. I just always seems to be the point man, even if I have LRMs on my mech.) However, I don't think it's too much to ask at the same time that, if you are shooting a target and can get a lock, to just try?
Wont tell you how many times that I turn around a corner where I know my allies are (and I know they are fighting an enemy mech), and I'm the one who has to get the lock for my LRMs. Just yesterday I had a match where my team was mopping up the last few enemy mechs as we basically stomped the enemy (sorry enemy team!), there are four friendly mechs surrounding a single lone enemy. Not one of them has a lock on the target till I jump over a building to join into the fight... (And no. I'm not saying they were doing it intentionally. I wouldn't know.)
FireStoat, on 21 March 2017 - 11:33 PM, said:
I only hit R when taking shots at mechs when my mech requires a lock due to weapons used or I'm firing at a mech at medium range or longer as the defined red box helps me center a shot while on the move a bit easier. People using LRM's should be getting their own locks and should be constantly moving to gain improved angles of fire so that a volley of missiles has the very best chance of landing 100% on the target.
The only case in which I'd give the nod to someone hanging back and lobbing missiles is if they are using a decent mixed weapon build and are running around with an orange / cherry open CT and they want to contribute for as long as they can without being taken out. Sometimes stuff happens and you just have to do the best you can. I get that.
In regards to the topic of Griefing, that would be people that are intentionally holding back on a decisive push to secure victory because they lack confidence in their skills. Or something.
LRMs are a utility weapon, and is often a force multiplier. It's the only weapon in the game that can shoot indirectly. However, it's a team weapon. Yes, I agree that LRM users should be on the patrol to get their own locks when and where possible, but at the same time it's not exactly taking full advantage of their weapon system if they are the only ones getting locks...
Overall, I'm not disagreeing with you here overall. I've always told people to do what you have to first, get locks later. I'm not discussing strategy, but just making the connection that purposefully not getting locks may boarder on the griefing side, depending upon intent.
Basically, is griefing an action, or is it the intent behind the action?
Relating this to a real world situation, it's like stealing. If someone walks out the door, it is technically theft. However, if someone just forgot they had something in their hand (they've been holding it through the entire store), walked out with it without paying, is it stealing? At this point, I have to say "not really", as there was no intent to not pay. If they realize it and turn around to pay for the item, than no. If they realize it, figured they are already outside, and leave, than yes the intent has now changed.
I feel it's the ending intent that forms the meaning. Not necessarily the action. Someone just shot you in the back, that's team damage! Well, they where at max zoom and you suddenly walked in front of their guns. They did not see you till after they pulled the trigger. Where they griefing you with that team damage? I'd have to say no. There was no intent to purposefully hinder you, it just happened.
Lykaon, on 22 March 2017 - 01:28 AM, said:
How often is the withholding of locks issolated from some form of verbal or typed harassment ?
I have on many occations seen the following.
Team player one " LRMs here pls hold locks"
Team player two " get your own locks you leach"
I get that ALL the time. I mentioned that in a group drop with my unit before, we had dropped with elements of a competitive unit (unit name withheld). They started to talk, and I just mentioned "I have some LRMs, so if you can hold locks it would be nice." Instant responses of "On no, not an LRM boat" and "I guess we have to get our carry harder pants on", etc. I didn't see any locks from them (they may have, it did get a bit chaotic), though I know my unitmates where getting locks as they could (and dropping them too, as expected).
Lets just say, I did reasonable damage, I was on the front lines the whole time, and I did as much damage with the LRMs as I did my lasers I had equipped. We also soundly defeated the enemy team, despite our side having "two LRM 'boats'"... (It's a matter of how you play it most times, not what you bring with you.)
Lykaon, on 22 March 2017 - 01:28 AM, said:
This IS definativley griefing behavior. There is no ambiguity to motive the intent is clear player two doesn't like LRM use so is going to activley do something to hamper player one.
So willfully altering your play style with the specific intent of hampering a team mate is griefing them and your other team mates and ironicly yourself. You could be getting LRM fire support but...nope they would rather not play correctly to express their all important displeasure with assumed behavior of a team mate.
I think people purposefully do that though to make LRMs look as bad as possible and to discourage their use whenever possible. Very much like going into any LRM thread they find on the forums to "inform people how bad they are" instead of answering the user's questions about LRMs.
If they can make playing LRMs frustrating and/or make them appear worse than they are, than they are probably justifying their actions as a service to the community by forcing those players to "take real weapon". (And no. I'm not saying LRMs are the greatest weapon, but they certainly are not the worst weapon either...)
7
