106 replies to this topic

[Bishop Steiner]

Prosperity Park, on 20 May 2017 - 09:14 AM, said:

I have a cutefox with triple AMS overload, ECM, neraly full sensor tree, and depending on weapons 2.5 - 3.5 tons AMS ammo. LRMs tend to not affect me or my teammates when I run that build. It's strange.

buh buh I needs that tonnage for mah metawepons build yo!

[James The Fox Dixon]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 May 2017 - 07:30 PM, said:

buh buh I needs that tonnage for mah metawepons build yo!

Howdy bud, long time no see.

I have finally narrowed it down to two types of players in MWO. One that is a team player that fully works with the team. The other is a guy that says he's a team player, but is actually a solo glory hound that nominally works well in a team. You can tell the former by their W/L ratio for their entire team vs. the guy with the best KDR.

[justcallme A S H]

Prosperity Park, on 20 May 2017 - 09:57 AM, said:

and the nodes needed for Radar Derp and AMS overload don't stop you from also mounting Seismic Sensors, target info gathering, advanced sensor range

Well they don't stop you from it, but they are forced upon you, even if you don't want them.

[50 50]

Viktor Drake, on 21 May 2017 - 12:29 PM, said:

What the OP isn't taking into account is that prior to the skill tree, you didn't have to gimp your mech in order to mount a Radar Dep module. Now you do which is why most people aren't mounting Radar Dep and LRMs are becoming a problem again.

This is better.
Everyone took two modules before.
Radar Dep and Seismic.
Now we are starting to see the effect of skill tree choices and a weapon that was so heavily out of favour start to get a bit of parity.
In solo queue, if you are going to drop there in a mech that has no AMS and has not invested into sensors, then you have to be aware and prepared for what that decision means.
Group queue offers some comfort in that a team can now build around roles.

IS mechs have a slight advantage in this as all of their mechs have at least 1 AMS hardpoint.
For the clans, it means swapping in a omnipod that can mount an AMS which therefore will alter other weapon hardpoints.

It's shaking up the game play a bit and overall, I am finding the battles more dynamic and engaging.

[50 50]

Tarl Cabot, on 21 May 2017 - 03:49 PM, said:

• When ever there is an event, the LRMS users come out in droves.
  
• Now though, many have also skipped some or all the Radar Dep nodes
  
• And many have not equipped AMS, even after PGI allowed players to get points for shooting down incoming to friendly mechs
  
• The new Skill Tree /Sensors also allowed players access to modules they may not have previously equipped due to lack of module space but now they have different levels of Target Retention & Target Decay.
  
  • And the above is not just the LRM boats themselves but others who may also be spotting for them, retaining their own locks longer.

I started reading that and actually thought you had gone to the trouble of making it rhyme.
Well said either way.

[Mystere]

Bush Hopper, on 21 May 2017 - 10:58 AM, said:

The only thing I truly hate about LRMs is that they are another nail in the coffin of brawling. As soon as the missile message pops up you have to disengage because a dude out of LoS pushes R and his mouse button. That's bad game design and to blame is the easy accessible lock mechanic

Ahem! Isn't that the whole point of indirect fire.

And if your first instinct is to run and hide from the rain, then AMS and radar deprivation should be your best friends. That's what they are there for. Thus, your decision to not use them is your choice, not "bad design". The latter is just an excuse, and a cheap one at that.

But until people learn that lesson, I will be bringing out my rainmakers. <SHRUGS>

Edited by Mystere, 21 May 2017 - 07:56 PM.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Bush Hopper, on 21 May 2017 - 10:58 AM, said:

The only thing I truly hate about LRMs is that they are another nail in the coffin of brawling. As soon as the missile message pops up you have to disengage because a dude out of LoS pushes R and his mouse button. That's bad game design and to blame is the easy accessible lock mechanic

No, it means you're a terrible mech designer and doesn't make the smartest skill choices. You can choose to mount AMS/ECM/Et al.. and take the right skill nodes or you can blame someone that is playing the game as intended. It's easy to tell that about a person is that the first place they go to place the blame is on the game designers and ignore their own faults. We have the ability to reason and use introspection to see where we failed then alter our actions in the future based upon this new information. You haven't shown that in this thread that you reasoned and did introspection before placing the blame for your choices onto the designers.

[Mystere]

Viktor Drake, on 21 May 2017 - 12:29 PM, said:

What the OP isn't taking into account is that prior to the skill tree, you didn't have to gimp your mech in order to mount a Radar Dep module. Now you do which is why most people aren't mounting Radar Dep and LRMs are becoming a problem again.

LRMs are only a huge problem for those who are willingly unprepared for them. But those who are, have options.

[Ultimax]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 May 2017 - 07:30 PM, said:

buh buh I needs that tonnage for mah metawepons build yo!

I took a mech out with AMS tonight and it was garbage (for the first time in like, 18 months).

I let myself get LRM'd a bit just to test it and I took enough damage to convince me that the 1.5 tons I spent (clan AMS + ammo) would be better elsewhere.

So yes, it is not good enough to justify the loss of tonnage and I'd rather put that into more weapons, DHS or TC (and max or near max armor most of the time).

Edited by Ultimax, 21 May 2017 - 08:05 PM.

[Mystere]

Peacemak3r, on 21 May 2017 - 01:04 PM, said:

OH you dont want to gimp your loadout/skilltree? A highly skilled lrm scrub will make you quit the game.

Yeah that sounds like a nice mechanic.

Whether to concentrate on offense or defense is a choice you have to make.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Ultimax, on 21 May 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

I took a mech out with AMS tonight and it was garbage (for the first time in like, 18 months).

I let myself get LRM'd a bit just to test it and I took enough damage to convince me that the 1.5 tons I spent (clan AMS + ammo) would be better elsewhere.

So yes, it is not good enough to justify the loss of tonnage and I'd rather put that into more weapons, DHS or TC (and max or near max armor most of the time).

Which type of player are you; the team player that builds your mechs to suit your team or the solo glory hound that nominally works well in a team?

I can guess that it is the latter because if you had stated what the entire lance you were in was sporting AMS and you took damage I can understand the sentiment. However, you didn't, so that leaves it to the former. Also, AMS was never designed to stop you from taking damage. It is designed to stop you from taking all of the damage. AMS is also stackable, so if you had another mech or two or three in your lance all running AMS then you wouldn't have taken damage. It's been that way since they were introduced four years ago.

[Trev Firestorm]

Ultimax, on 21 May 2017 - 08:05 PM, said:

I took a mech out with AMS tonight and it was garbage (for the first time in like, 18 months).

I let myself get LRM'd a bit just to test it and I took enough damage to convince me that the 1.5 tons I spent (clan AMS + ammo) would be better elsewhere.

So yes, it is not good enough to justify the loss of tonnage and I'd rather put that into more weapons, DHS or TC (and max or near max armor most of the time).

Well have fun in the rain then, it has always been know that a single ams by itself does little, 2+ makes a huge impact though. Its a team play thing, just like focus fire but automatic. Get 5+ ams together and you can /completely/ ignore LRM boats and slow march on them while they piss themselves unable to respond.

[Ultimax]

James The Fox Dixon, on 21 May 2017 - 08:09 PM, said:

Which type of player are you; the team player that builds your mechs to suit your team or the solo glory hound that nominally works well in a team?

I can guess that it is the latter because if you had stated what the entire lance you were in was sporting AMS and you took damage I can understand the sentiment. However, you didn't, so that leaves it to the former. Also, AMS was never designed to stop you from taking damage. It is designed to stop you from taking all of the damage. AMS is also stackable, so if you had another mech or two or three in your lance all running AMS then you wouldn't have taken damage. It's been that way since they were introduced four years ago.

Or I could just like, use cover - play smart and out trade the LRM mechs?

The day you see 12 mechs on your team all sporting AMS in the solo queue will be when hell freezes over.

Trev Firestorm, on 21 May 2017 - 08:13 PM, said:

Well have fun in the rain then, it has always been know that a single ams by itself does little, 2+ makes a huge impact though. Its a team play thing, just like focus fire but automatic. Get 5+ ams together and you can /completely/ ignore LRM boats and slow march on them while they piss themselves unable to respond.

OK, so this is basic tactics that escapes most people - but when you have a bunch of ranged mechs on a team and you are making mid to long range trades - if you are all in range of each other's AMS you are too close and are susceptible to the enemy team getting flank positions on you or just getting brawl rushed.


I know the solo queue is a constant huddle where everyone holds hands for safety, but that's not actually the best way to play for mid/long range.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Trev Firestorm, on 21 May 2017 - 08:13 PM, said:

Well have fun in the rain then, it has always been know that a single ams by itself does little, 2+ makes a huge impact though. Its a team play thing, just like focus fire but automatic. Get 5+ ams together and you can /completely/ ignore LRM boats and slow march on them while they piss themselves unable to respond.

This thread makes me miss my A1 LRM Kitty.

Ultimax, on 21 May 2017 - 08:14 PM, said:

Or I could just like, use cover - play smart and out trade the LRM mechs?

The day you see 12 mechs on your team all sporting AMS in the solo queue will be when hell freezes over.

It must have froze over because four years ago everyone was sporting AMS on their mechs. I guess you youngsters haven't learned from the veterans on how to counter LRMs well enough and want to cry about them.

Edited by James The Fox Dixon, 21 May 2017 - 08:18 PM.

[Trev Firestorm]

Ultimax, on 21 May 2017 - 08:16 PM, said:

OK, so this is basic tactics that escapes most people - but when you have a bunch of ranged mechs on a team and you are making mid to long range trades - if you are all in range of each other's AMS you are too close and are susceptible to the enemy team getting flank positions on you or just getting brawl rushed.

Sure, if you're into static poke play, but that is stale and ineffective in the face of (smart) aggressive play. All of which is irrelevant to the discussion at hand. AMS works, Radar dep works, cover works so don't cry about LRMs. You are a fan of #3, which is fine, but 1 and 2 both work as well.

Edit: Remember also, Lances are 4 member units which can work in proximity without becoming a deathball,depending on the mechs brought you should have 3-12(don't bring 12) AMS while moving with enough overlap to get the job done. Meanwhile you have 2 other 4man units able to do the same.

Edited by Trev Firestorm, 21 May 2017 - 08:28 PM.

[Ultimax]

James The Fox Dixon, on 21 May 2017 - 08:17 PM, said:

It must have froze over because four years ago everyone was sporting AMS on their mechs. I guess you youngsters haven't learned from the veterans on how to counter LRMs well enough and want to cry about them.

Yes, clearly, "using cover, playing smart and out trading LRM mechs" is "crying about them".

OK Captain T4, whatever works for you.

Trev Firestorm, on 21 May 2017 - 08:22 PM, said:

Sure, if you're into static poke play, but that is stale and ineffective in the face of (smart) aggressive play.

If it's static, it means the team with long range either has total dominance of the field and the enemy is stifled or it means they are doing it wrong and should be working to envelope the other team.

If you only play solo queue you've likely never seen it.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Ultimax, on 21 May 2017 - 08:31 PM, said:

Yes, clearly, "using cover, playing smart and out trading LRM mechs" is "crying about them".

OK Captain T4, whatever works for you.

Oh that's hilarious to comment about my tier when I've been out of the game for 4 years and I've only dropped in 1 match since I've been back.

My W/L ratio as drop commander is 90%. What is yours? I don't care about your tier or your KDR. I only care about the W/L ratio. Bishop Steiner and Mystere can vouch for how good I was as a commander and a pilot of lights, mediums, and heavies as I dropped against/with them plenty back in the day.

See the difference between you and I is that I am a team player fully committed to my team to the point that I build all the mechs for a specific strategy to win. That's all that matters. I don't care if you do 1,000,000 points of damage and have a 7:1 KDR when you have a 30% W/L record. Why you may ask? Because the 1,000,000 points of damage and 7:1 KDR combined with the 30% W/L record tells me that you are a solo glory hound that works nominally with a team and not a committed team player. It also tells me that you would refuse to listen to commands in a PUG and that you are only in it for yourself.

You need to learn how to insult someone better.

[Bishop Steiner]

James The Fox Dixon, on 21 May 2017 - 08:17 PM, said:

This thread makes me miss my A1 LRM Kitty.



It must have froze over because four years ago everyone was sporting AMS on their mechs. I guess you youngsters haven't learned from the veterans on how to counter LRMs well enough and want to cry about them.

Eh, depends on the scenario, TBH. I build things pretty specific to use. (Though some are pretty "cross platform").

My QP builds, TBH, I don't tend to carry AMS, unless it's a mech with 2 or more, because if you can't count on anyone else to have it, a single AMS is a waste. So in that regard, Ultimax has a point.

That said, if I have my 2-3 AMS builds? I'll usually support my Fatties, even in QP, especially with ECM.

In team play, I'll often build with the umbrella mindset.

That said, I do PUG more often than not, and as a flanker/skirmisher, I do tend to rely on cover and concealment first, hardware last. There is a time and a place. Problem is, realistically? Playing Solo QP, reality is you will play with more Rambos than Team Players, so I do build my Gundams a little more selfish for that.

I still wish they would have taken my build idea for a Vindicator Hero (also would have worked on the Assassin, better than DerpDeath, anyhow), with ECM and 6x AMS for giggles.

[James The Fox Dixon]

Bishop Steiner, on 21 May 2017 - 09:38 PM, said:

Eh, depends on the scenario, TBH. I build things pretty specific to use. (Though some are pretty "cross platform").

My QP builds, TBH, I don't tend to carry AMS, unless it's a mech with 2 or more, because if you can't count on anyone else to have it, a single AMS is a waste. So in that regard, Ultimax has a point.

That said, if I have my 2-3 AMS builds? I'll usually support my Fatties, even in QP, especially with ECM.

In team play, I'll often build with the umbrella mindset.

That said, I do PUG more often than not, and as a flanker/skirmisher, I do tend to rely on cover and concealment first, hardware last. There is a time and a place. Problem is, realistically? Playing Solo QP, reality is you will play with more Rambos than Team Players, so I do build my Gundams a little more selfish for that.

I still wish they would have taken my build idea for a Vindicator Hero (also would have worked on the Assassin, better than DerpDeath, anyhow), with ECM and 6x AMS for giggles.

If people want the meta to change to their liking they'll just have to adapt. In order to adapt they need to adopt the old methods where it was standard for every mech that could sport AMS would and have the ammo needed. You know this as well as I do since we're long in the tooth.

I used to PUG a lot until I joined HSX then Carrion Crows. After that it was all team play. Since I was one of the tacticians for the unit, my time away from the game was working on mech builds and map specific strategies to win. Yes, I was one of those people that unpacked the big map's texture files just to work out winning strategies.

However, once my tactics and builds became known people would copy it. That's all it takes is to have other people copy what you're doing and the meta changes.

I also know that using AMS is very role dependent. If you're scout then you don't want to use it because it gives away your position. You might as well put a huge neon sign that says, "Shoot me please! I'm infiltrating your lines!". There is a place for every piece of equipment for the roles designed. However, if you are a brawler, sniper, or support then you need it on your mech as standard equipment. Whoopty doo if your DPS drops a tiny bit as that won't matter if you get hit with a steady stream of LRMs and you die to the enemy brawlers in two to four hits. A dead mech adds 0 DPS.

LOL I love that hero mech design. It would literally rock.

[Kin3ticX]

AMS is waste tonnage

Youre just gonna die to LRMs sometimes but LRMs are more likely to run into feast or famine issues than anything else

Edited by Kin3ticX, 21 May 2017 - 10:01 PM.