Consumables
#1
Posted 13 July 2017 - 04:10 PM
I have had so many damn games now where I will get bombarded by air strikes and artillery. Got hit by a airstrike and couldn't get out of it so I had to suffer it bringing me down to 75% health then another arty to put the cherry on top to put me at 65% health. I may be just venting my anger about this but doesn't anyone else here having the same problem with "spamming" airstrikes and arty?
#3
Posted 13 July 2017 - 04:41 PM
It's justified too. They offer a huge advantage - they can blunt pushes, they can hit mechs in cover, they can force mechs into cover, they can strip huge amounts of armour from the enemy team if you hit multiple mechs, they can wreck already damaged mechs...
I sometimes use 2 of them on my mechs. I'm part of the problem.
I don't judge others for using them though. If there's a system that gives you an advantage, why not use it?
Maybe if everyone equips them, the whining might reach critical mass.
Personally, I really only have an issue with Airstrikes. Artillery is far easier to dodge, or get out of the blast zone. Airstrikes in the hands of a skilled user can nail you a long way from the smoke point.
As for fixes, I think there should be a radar and HUD warning for airstrikes. It's easy to hide the smoke. It only makes sense that an incoming fighter would trigger radar warnings somewhere. A hud alert and direction of incoming fire would go a long way to balancing that.
For Artillery... triple the duration of the strike. You could even increase the damage, but make it more of an area bombardment and denial tool, rather than a surgical artillery sniper strike.
#4
Posted 13 July 2017 - 06:52 PM
Also, at one time in the not to distant past, PGI shutdown the ability to carry more than 1 strike. at that time, to paraphrase the reasoning, the possibility of 2 per mech was just too much...
#5
Posted 13 July 2017 - 07:06 PM
#6
Posted 13 July 2017 - 07:20 PM
#8
Posted 13 July 2017 - 07:54 PM
Kiiyor, on 13 July 2017 - 04:41 PM, said:
Money.
Bohxim, on 13 July 2017 - 07:20 PM, said:
That's not welcoming at all.
Edited by Alcom Isst, 13 July 2017 - 07:56 PM.
#9
Posted 13 July 2017 - 08:27 PM
King Harkinian, on 13 July 2017 - 07:33 PM, said:
Integrity.
Fair enough. Something lacking in most competitive games.
I'm all for restricting or balancing strong/exploitive game mechanics, but judging people or placing the expectation on them not to run effective builds/equipment/tactics isn't addressing the problem - it's simply shifting blame from the system itself to the players.
It's hard to avoid falling down that rabbit hole though when some ****** lands a double air strike on you through cover.
#10
Posted 13 July 2017 - 09:37 PM
Intent of design is usually what allows us to differentiate between an inherent balance issue, or whether or not a mechanic is being exploited or circumvented.
In the case of consumes, intent of design is quite obvious, just the balance is a bit off.
So therefore I don't hold the use of them against the community or place a lot of expectation on them to abstain from using them. They're in the game, the intent of design is clear - fair game for the community to go wild with in my opinion.
But it is a crutch at the end of the day, regardless.
#11
Posted 13 July 2017 - 11:06 PM
#12
Posted 13 July 2017 - 11:22 PM
#13
Posted 14 July 2017 - 02:55 AM
So while we should no doubt balance the amount of specific consumables we should really also make them free to use so that it's not only the c-bills rich that get to enjoy this entire mechanic.
#14
Posted 14 July 2017 - 04:08 AM
LordNothing, on 13 July 2017 - 11:06 PM, said:
Each Air Strike nets me on average about 50-100 damage, although I had gotten about 300 damage with a single strike on a lucky day. That's 100-200 additional damage per game. For the low low price of four nodes. No other skill tree offers such an improvement with just four nodes. Double strike is insanely good. Strikes not only damage the enemy, but they also force the other side to abandon their spot.
My WLR and KDR had noticeably improved once I am able to use up to 4 consumables per game (2 coolshots and 2 strikes). Just compare my Season 13 stats with previous seasons. Consumables are literally Pay to Win in the in-game money sense. I don't mind spending 160,000 C-Bills per match since I am rich in C-Bills, but it only serves to further distance the performance of veterans from the newbies--which is not healthy for this game.
Edited by El Bandito, 14 July 2017 - 04:25 AM.
#15
Posted 14 July 2017 - 07:10 AM
#16
Posted 14 July 2017 - 07:20 AM
#17
Posted 14 July 2017 - 07:33 AM
https://mwomercs.com...esairstrikes-op
#19
Posted 14 July 2017 - 09:25 AM
King Harkinian, on 13 July 2017 - 07:33 PM, said:
Integrity.
No, that's basically the definition of being a scrub. And I'm not one to toss that around lightly (especially as I'm a very casual player myself, unapologetic member of the Barely Adequate Gamers). You are literally inventing rules that are not part of the game and finding some kind of excuse to look down your nose at people that dare to play the game differently than you think it should be played. Back in middle school we called things like throws and boxing the opponent into the corner in Street Fighter II and Mortal Kombat "cheese" and "corner crap", And what it really was? It was us being scrubs.
So don't sit there and imagine you have some kind of "integrity" because you set up rules for the game that other players have no way to know about.
As for myself, while getting hit by repeated strikes sucks, I recognize it as part of the game. Most of my mechs pack 2 consumables: a cool shot and a UAV. I don't bother with strikes most of the time because they're too unreliable in the solo queue (where most of my matches take place). That and I can usually find more consistent benefit from allocating my skill nodes more towards mobility, survival, and firepower.
#20
Posted 14 July 2017 - 09:36 AM
It's not a rule, it's a personal code of ethics to not use something that is skilless as a crutch.
If anyone is a scrub, it's people spamming strikes.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users