42 replies to this topic

[TercieI]

Wintersdark, on 26 February 2017 - 09:46 AM, said:

But you get paid for all sorts of equipment?

Fair point, though I disagree with the approach. Payment should be for winning, or at least contribution to (attempted) winning. Nobody who is serious about winning and understands the game takes AMS, so paying it is really absurd. What follows? 100,000CB bonus for equipping the (dead weight) Command Console?

Edited by TercieI, 26 February 2017 - 10:19 AM.

[Wintersdark]

TercieI, on 26 February 2017 - 10:18 AM, said:

Fair point, though I disagree with the approach. Payment should be for winning, or at least contribution to winning. Nobody who is serious about winning and understands the game takes AMS.

*At your level of play.

At entry level play, LRM's are tremendously powerful.

As I said above, it's not even so much about AMS specifically but rather encouraging players to play better. Wouldn't you rather that newer player the matchmaker saddled you with be more encouraged to stay close, rather than run off alone on a Brilliant Rambo Flanking Mission?

Step back, and look at it like a game designer. Rewards exist to motivate players to behave how you want them to behave. That is their purpose. There are more sorts of players than you and yours, and those people need to be motivated to play better, because left to their own devices they won't, then you get saddled with those Terribad Pugs.

This sort of thing teaches them to Be Better. They think they're earning money because they equipped AMS, but that's actually an aside. They're getting paid more by being more active and aware players, and they'll keep those habits when they inevitably remove AMS at higher level play because there are so few LRM's.

Edited by Wintersdark, 26 February 2017 - 10:25 AM.

[MacClearly]

Wintersdark, on 26 February 2017 - 10:11 AM, said:

I said this above in the post you quoted:


Just taking AMS isn't going to make you many cbills.  You need to take AMS, then actively move to protect players; you need to stay with your team and not run off alone.  

After all, there's a reward for countering ECM.   Take an Active Probe, and just stand near enemy ECM mechs - it's still just autonomous and automatic, but you're making money - some positioning required to get something decent out of it, of course, but you don't actually have to DO anything other than just be somewhere.

AMS is the same.  Take it, hide in the back with ERLL or LRM's, you're not going to make any money of note.  Get up with the team, play better and you make more money.  

That's exactly what rewards are for - making players do what you want them to do.  It's not REALLY so much about rewarding AMS usage in particular but rather encouraging players to play better.  That's really tough to do, normally, but this is one way that you can do it.  

Even if you're not clicking a button, you ARE doing something for your team.  Just like capturing a base (which you also get paid for), bringing that AMS umbrella where it's needed is an action, that came at a cost.

I don't particularly like the bap reward either. Not a fan for paying for ecm coverage. So it is clear we think very differently and are never going to agree.

[Jman5]

TercieI, on 26 February 2017 - 09:33 AM, said:

Like any other piece of equipment, it should provide enough benefit that you don't need to be paid to bring it. It doesn't.

Disagree, but this is why I'm mostly interested in having the game list the number of missiles you shoot down. So people can make more informed decisions.

Edited by Jman5, 26 February 2017 - 10:35 AM.

[TercieI]

Wintersdark, on 26 February 2017 - 10:24 AM, said:

*At your level of play.

At entry level play, LRM's are tremendously powerful.

As I said above, it's not even so much about AMS specifically but rather encouraging players to play better. Wouldn't you rather that newer player the matchmaker saddled you with be more encouraged to stay close, rather than run off alone on a Brilliant Rambo Flanking Mission?

Step back, and look at it like a game designer. Rewards exist to motivate players to behave how you want them to behave. That is their purpose. There are more sorts of players than you and yours, and those people need to be motivated to play better, because left to their own devices they won't, then you get saddled with those Terribad Pugs.

This sort of thing teaches them to Be Better. They think they're earning money because they equipped AMS, but that's actually an aside. They're getting paid more by being more active and aware players, and they'll keep those habits when they inevitably remove AMS at higher level play because there are so few LRM's.

Maybe. I still think incentivizing winning teaches people to play to win better than any half measure.

Jman5, on 26 February 2017 - 10:35 AM, said:

Disagree, but this is why I'm mostly interested in having the game list the number of missiles you shoot down. So people can make more informed decisions.

I never object to better and more information.

[Wintersdark]

TercieI, on 26 February 2017 - 10:40 AM, said:

Maybe. I still think incentivizing winning teaches people to play to win better than any half measure.

It doesn't, though. It works for more serious gamers and smarter folks, sure. For you, it works fine because you're capable of making good observations about why you lost a game.

Most players, they're not able to do that. They can't look at the game outside of their own narrow perspective, and it's so much easier to blame Everything Else.



After all, look at how often newer players insist they lose because LRM's are overpowered and broken. Or they lost because the guy they were fighting had modules and they didn't.

These people aren't going to make good decisions, and if you just reward winning, they'll never get rewards, and this won't motivate them to learn to be better, it'll just make them give up.

It's kind of like parenting. Often, you can't just tell your children what to do - they'll simply do the opposite of what you say because they're ******* children. You have find ways to make them come to a conclusion but thinking it's their own idea. To account for these players, you need to find ways to encourage them to do things that will make them win more often.



And it's important to do that, because otherwise you have more random players who never learn basic elements of how to succeed in a team based game (which this always is, even in solo play) and attempts to tell them what to do just gets their hackles up in "YOU CAN'T TELL ME WHAT TO DO" stupid teenager mode. Then they just sink teams with their stupid.


I agree completely that at any serious level of play, AMS isn't helpful. I'm right on board with you there. But then, having a reward for AMS does no harm - anyone who's using it isn't at your level of play, and the 1t difference on their mech isn't going to make an appreciable difference to their contribution.

So this reward does no harm. But if it DOES make those random T4's that end up in your matches stay with the team instead of lagging behind, hiding behind a rock, or running off Rambo style - doesn't that help you? Doesn't that lead to better games?

Edited by Wintersdark, 26 February 2017 - 11:07 AM.

[Bulletsponge0]

Wintersdark, on 26 February 2017 - 09:15 AM, said:

That already applies to a lot of existing equipment.

It does make sense, though. Many players don't really understand the purpose of rewards in a game. Rewards exist to encourage player behavior. That's why we have those new rewards for things like Lance proximity. You literally get paid for standing near your Lance mates, and such

The idea is to encourage teamwork.

People usually don't bring AMS because it requires a sacrifice of tonnage and space but often doesn't help the player at all but instead his teammates. It literally costs you in earning potential.

You want to reward AMS usage because it means you're working together. To best utilize it, positioning is important - you need to stay with your team and not run off alone.

Things that encourage teamwork are good. Fewer pug matches where everyone runs off alone? I can live with that.

Like a TAG and the associated rewards PGI gave it? NARC?

[TercieI]

Wintersdark, on 26 February 2017 - 11:05 AM, said:

It doesn't, though. It works for more serious gamers and smarter folks, sure. For you, it works fine because you're capable of making good observations about why you lost a game.

I only lose because my teammates suck, of course.

I do understand what you're saying. Philosophically, I don't like it, but strictly pragmatically, you might have a point (though I still don't recommend AMS to anyone).

[Baulven]

If Ams was better (therefore desirable to bring) PGI could easily buff LRMs to a decent weapon system. Tightening spread and doubling the speed would make tangible differences in how they operate, while simultaneously encouraging support equipment to be utilized.

The reason LRMs are terrible is that people use them at max range and they have too many hard counters. If you lessened hard counters vs the system they become better (i.e. narc boat on polar highlands leads to death unless you move under ECM or move fast enough to leave LRM range.)

[Snazzy Dragon]

It takes virtually no effort to swap a heatsink out for an AMS and a half ton of ammo for it. Players are already awarded for putting virtually no effort into their matches. If LRMs are a problem for you personally, then know that there are four counters-- knowing the terrain around you that will stop the missiles, radar deprivation modules, AMS, and ECM. If these aren't enough for you, you can always boat AC/2s and aim for people's cockpits that dare to fire LRMs at you. They'll probably be discouraged by the constant screen shake and being blinded by an unrelenting hail of bullets.

I do not support AMS rewards because it will also kill off what tiny niche LRMs have already-- killing bad players in quick play.

[Wintersdark]

Bulletsponge0, on 26 February 2017 - 11:19 AM, said:

Like a TAG and the associated rewards PGI gave it? NARC?

I'm not sure exactly what you mean here.

TAG and NARC can cost you earnings (as you could have mounted weapons instead) but if used in combination with your own streaks/lurms, it gets complicated.

But yes, they have rewards added in an attempt to get more players employing teamwork (though from a purely competitive level, you're ALWAYS better off equipping"real" weapons) and to help make "Scout" a slightly less horribly paying role. Good intentions but not terribly effective.

Still, my argument at the core is the same with this: rewarding those tools does no harm, and it does encourage people to build habits of supporting each other, which is overall a fine goal.

Same with AMS rewards. No harm is done, and good behavior is encouraged.

What I find curious is how many people are immediately resistant to the notion that someone may receive a reward for something they don't want to do themselves. So what? Don't mount AMS if you don't want to, and nothing changes for you. Nobody is taking any rewards away.

[Bulletsponge0]

Wintersdark, on 26 February 2017 - 04:48 PM, said:

I'm not sure exactly what you mean here.

TAG and NARC can cost you earnings (as you could have mounted weapons instead) but if used in combination with your own streaks/lurms, it gets complicated.

But yes, they have rewards added in an attempt to get more players employing teamwork (though from a purely competitive level, you're ALWAYS better off equipping"real" weapons) and to help make "Scout" a slightly less horribly paying role. Good intentions but not terribly effective.

Still, my argument at the core is the same with this: rewarding those tools does no harm, and it does encourage people to build habits of supporting each other, which is overall a fine goal.

Same with AMS rewards. No harm is done, and good behavior is encouraged.

What I find curious is how many people are immediately resistant to the notion that someone may receive a reward for something they don't want to do themselves. So what? Don't mount AMS if you don't want to, and nothing changes for you. Nobody is taking any rewards away.

I think we have some wires crossed. I'm all for giving AMS rewards

[Wintersdark]

Snazzy Dragon, on 26 February 2017 - 02:33 PM, said:

It takes virtually no effort to swap a heatsink out for an AMS and a half ton of ammo for it. Players are already awarded for putting virtually no effort into their matches. If LRMs are a problem for you personally, then know that there are four counters-- knowing the terrain around you that will stop the missiles, radar deprivation modules, AMS, and ECM. If these aren't enough for you, you can always boat AC/2s and aim for people's cockpits that dare to fire LRMs at you. They'll probably be discouraged by the constant screen shake and being blinded by an unrelenting hail of bullets.

I do not support AMS rewards because it will also kill off what tiny niche LRMs have already-- killing bad players in quick play.

It WOULD be a nerf to LRM's. However, AMS is an interesting beast with regards to LRM's. Unlike hard counters which are extremely hard to balance around (feast or famine is really bad for game design) AMS is scalar.


Radar derp is an abomination, to be honest, and should never have been added to the game for that very reason.

In a world where hard counters give way to soft counters, strategy and tactics open up.

Bulletsponge0, on 26 February 2017 - 04:49 PM, said:

I think we have some wires crossed. I'm all for giving AMS rewards

As per the first line in my post, I wasnt sure what you meant

[Wintersdark]

TercieI, on 26 February 2017 - 11:52 AM, said:

I only lose because my teammates suck, of course.

I do understand what you're saying. Philosophically, I don't like it, but strictly pragmatically, you might have a point (though I still don't recommend AMS to anyone).

Absolutely. Until such a time as LRM's are improved (as in, become a more reliable weapon system) AMS is never going to be worth using competitively.

That's no reason not to better things, however. As I allude to above, a more worthwhile to mount AMS may lead to a more stable LRM system in the future.

Also, we're (probably) getting MRM's soon with the tech update. AMS is useless vs SRM's due to the range issue, but MRM's?

Edited by Wintersdark, 26 February 2017 - 04:58 PM.

[Coolant]

agree with OP 100%

[Tesunie]

Although I would fear (moderately at least) massed AMS killing any LRM potenial (and those who know me know I do have a pension towards LRMs and I do like them), I wouldn't complain about AMS getting a "you protected a buddy" reward. It would promote better teamwork and "networking" your AMS to protect not just yourself but also your allies.

It would be very similar to the Protected rewards, as well as similar rewards, such as killing an enemy mech hitting a heavily damaged ally mech. Learn how to master AMS protection, and you'd be surprised at what a single AMS system actually can do. People don't believe me when I say a single AMS system is very capable of taking down upwards of 10 if not even 15 missiles out of a volley... if positioned well to intercept those missiles.


Being rewarded for protecting allies and working in a better team manner, should be a thing. It shouldn't really reward you for when you are protecting yourself in my opinion. My concern here is only that it might make AMS so thick that LRMs can't even attempt to cut through it, forget about ECM, Radar Deprivation, etc...

[PlayerUnknown]

yeah, i like it when my team has ams, during an assault.

It comes in handy


hahah AMS amsperformance

Edited by JayRtech, 26 February 2017 - 05:44 PM.

[Bulletsponge0]

Tesunie, on 26 February 2017 - 05:32 PM, said:

Although I would fear (moderately at least) massed AMS killing any LRM potenial (and those who know me know I do have a pension towards LRMs and I do like them), I wouldn't complain about AMS getting a "you protected a buddy" reward. It would promote better teamwork and "networking" your AMS to protect not just yourself but also your allies.

It would be very similar to the Protected rewards, as well as similar rewards, such as killing an enemy mech hitting a heavily damaged ally mech. Learn how to master AMS protection, and you'd be surprised at what a single AMS system actually can do. People don't believe me when I say a single AMS system is very capable of taking down upwards of 10 if not even 15 missiles out of a volley... if positioned well to intercept those missiles.


Being rewarded for protecting allies and working in a better team manner, should be a thing. It shouldn't really reward you for when you are protecting yourself in my opinion. My concern here is only that it might make AMS so thick that LRMs can't even attempt to cut through it, forget about ECM, Radar Deprivation, etc...

might happen for a week or two...then people will stoip bringing LRMs, making AMS wasted tonnage and things will swing back to brawl/snipe... then people woill realize nobody has ams and LRms will come back..followed by ams, etc etc and so on and so on

[Tesunie]

Bulletsponge0, on 26 February 2017 - 05:54 PM, said:

might happen for a week or two...then people will stoip bringing LRMs, making AMS wasted tonnage and things will swing back to brawl/snipe... then people woill realize nobody has ams and LRms will come back..followed by ams, etc etc and so on and so on

Which isn't exactly a fun ride to be on. But, you are probably correct on the way we humans would interact with such a system. A nice little pendulum swing there... At least until it probably levels off a bit.

[Wintersdark]

Bulletsponge0, on 26 February 2017 - 05:54 PM, said:

might happen for a week or two...then people will stoip bringing LRMs, making AMS wasted tonnage and things will swing back to brawl/snipe... then people woill realize nobody has ams and LRms will come back..followed by ams, etc etc and so on and so on

Mmmhmm. It'd swing back and forth a bit until things settled into a middle ground. [Speculation] I think most people don't change builds around a whole lot. I know I do - I change builds every couple drops and certainly every play session, but I'm a wierdo who's obsessed with the mechlab. But it seems to me the bulk of players settle into a build that works for them and leave it mostly alone.

So, I'd expect increased AMS to result in overall decreased LRM use, moderately on both counts. But this would allow for some LRM tweaking.