216 replies to this topic

[The6thMessenger]

Quicksilver Kalasa, on 12 October 2017 - 04:57 PM, said:

It makes sense given this is not a turn-based strategy game as well as the balance of the game.

Exactly what i said.

[Alan Hicks]

The R key not only helps identify your enemy's weak points but lets information be shared. Collaborate with long range missile boats, why not? this is a team game. So there you have just a key that does multiple things around for the benefit of everyone.

Hate lrms abuse ? Well yes, when there's more than 3 on your team. Only in some maps, plenty come out handy.

The buddy lock as you call it helps with team inclusiveness. But I guess lrms haters don't even see those as buddies since they can't even help themselves or others by pressing a simply key.

The long range missiles have been hurt enough along the way, in some maps is an almost complete and useless weapon. What you ask will never happen, this suggestion just fuels more hate into a now nearly absurd topic which needs to die among this community.

[OrmsbyGore]

Joey Tankblaster, on 09 October 2017 - 07:10 AM, said:

Ok gents,

this is not a rant about LURMs in general but more a rant about LURM pilots. The whole buddy lock feature in MWO is really painful and nonsense from a game design perspective.

I just hate those LURM pilots who do not share their armour, intel and firepower with their team in a meaningful way.

We already have lock after direct sighting, TAG-laser, UAVs and NARC. This is enough. I really don't see the necessity to promote a playstyle which favours cowardeous hidding in the third row waiting for others to do the job (e.g. locking up targets).

Buddy lock destroys role warfare. Lights on a scouting mission just get cought by an enemy light, locked up and lurmed to death. It's senseless.

What is the point of this design? I am fine with a substantial buff for LURMs if buddy lock is removed.

Get rid of buddy lock ASAP.

My 2 cents

Are you sure this isn't a rant against LRMs? I mean, you mention that weapon system specifically, your proposed fix targets them exclusively, and you do nothing to address the problem of assaults (Or heavies) who refuse to come to the front lines and share armor. What about gauss/ppc/LL/erLL assaults? How will your solution get them to stop hiding in the back?

And I've seen a lot of people mention that LRMs prevent new pilot's from getting better, either by serving as a crutch for those who use them or a seemingly impossible hurdle for those targeted by them. Really? LRMs were in the game when I started playing, how did I get better? I don't claim to be an elite competitive player, but even on polar in an assault I'm not going to get killed by LRMs, unless I've been narced/tagged/spotted by a light or something, in which case the red team has executed a well coordinated attack, they deserve the kill.

The biggest reason (imho) that we see so much bad play is that the game doesn't teach you how to play; you have yo go online to learn how to be an effective player (Or become the padawan for a better player, I suppose).

If the academy taught players about positioning, if there were little tutorials for how to use each weapon system, if the benefits of armor sharing and torso twisting, players would arrive at the battlefield with more developed skills and a better understanding of how to operate as part of a team. Instead, we just get NASCAR and laser vomit on every map in every game mode.

Personally I'd like to see mech class access limited by pilot skill; I firmly believe only the best pilots should be in assaults as most mistakes lead to death and I hate to see my team lose 100 tons of armor and firepower b/c a pilot was using more mech than they can handle (having said that, I love to pilot assaults and am not the greatest pilot myself ������)

Edited by OrmsbyGore, 13 October 2017 - 05:28 AM.

[Vancer2]

Lurmers are like called Fire support for a reason. Definition of Fire support:. ... Typically, fire support is provided by artillery or close air support (usually directed by a forward observer), and is used to shape the battlefield or, more optimistically, define the battle.

They are not on the front lines. Learn your roles.

[OrmsbyGore]

Vancer2, on 14 October 2017 - 11:20 AM, said:

Lurmers are like called Fire support for a reason. Definition of Fire support:. ... Typically, fire support is provided by artillery or close air support (usually directed by a forward observer), and is used to shape the battlefield or, more optimistically, define the battle.

They are not on the front lines. Learn your roles.

The problem with using real world examples to justify in game behaviors is that the game doesn't translate well; in real life, you know your units' (Or battalion' s or company's) capabilities before you take the field; if you wanted to do that in group queue that would be fine (except of course that no one would want you to bring LRMs because of how ineffective they are when compared to direct fire weapons, but whatever, you do you) but in public queue that is especially obnoxious, since if I bring a brawler assault and all our other assaults are fire support, then an enemy push will crush us since fire support weapons aren't as effective in a brawl.

Bit really, if all you want to do is hide in the back and shoot at targets you can barely see, use a light or medium mech. Better yet, go play counterstrike or call of duty or any of the thousands of other fps games that play like that. Please let those of us who enjoy Smashing face in giant stompy robots have this one game.

Please don't misunderstand, I want to keep buddy lock, I just get triggered whenever someone tries to defend camping. Buddy luck is the only way to effectively let the entire team know where the enemy is. "But what about voip or typing?" Not everyone in the world speaks English

[LORD ORION]

Joey Tankblaster, on 09 October 2017 - 07:10 AM, said:

Ok gents,

this is not a rant about LURMs in general but more a rant about LURM pilots. The whole buddy lock feature in MWO is really painful and nonsense from a game design perspective.

I just hate those LURM pilots who do not share their armour, intel and firepower with their team in a meaningful way.

We already have lock after direct sighting, TAG-laser, UAVs and NARC. This is enough. I really don't see the necessity to promote a playstyle which favours cowardeous hidding in the third row waiting for others to do the job (e.g. locking up targets).

Buddy lock destroys role warfare. Lights on a scouting mission just get cought by an enemy light, locked up and lurmed to death. It's senseless.

What is the point of this design? I am fine with a substantial buff for LURMs if buddy lock is removed.

Get rid of buddy lock ASAP.

My 2 cents

Buddy lock only for IS mechs, because it works like C3, and only IS has C3

[Lykaon]

OrmsbyGore, on 14 October 2017 - 11:47 AM, said:

The problem with using real world examples to justify in game behaviors is that the game doesn't translate well; in real life, you know your units' (Or battalion' s or company's) capabilities before you take the field; if you wanted to do that in group queue that would be fine (except of course that no one would want you to bring LRMs because of how ineffective they are when compared to direct fire weapons, but whatever, you do you) but in public queue that is especially obnoxious, since if I bring a brawler assault and all our other assaults are fire support, then an enemy push will crush us since fire support weapons aren't as effective in a brawl.

Unless you adjust tactics and strategy to compensate for the weaknesses present.

Your assumption is that all assault mechs must be brawlers as the best means of magnifying any singular brawler's potential.

It's not the only way or even the best way it's just the easy way.

Without adiquate front line support you do not want to commit your slowest mechs to a battle line where it will become focused and destroyed easily due to the lack of other top priority targets.

So,instead of playing like you have 3 front line brawlers and getting slagged in seconds try adjusting to incorperate the presence of the LRMs.When you have more LRMs than brawlers your strategy is now an LRM centric one if you want to win.

Trying to use techniques for mechs you DO NOT HAVE will fail. Tring to make the LRM assaults into assault brawlers WILL FAIL!

Adapt to what you have and persevere. That is the true challenge

[OrmsbyGore]

Lykaon, on 14 October 2017 - 01:29 PM, said:

Unless you adjust tactics and strategy to compensate for the weaknesses present.

Your assumption is that all assault mechs must be brawlers as the best means of magnifying any singular brawler's potential.

It's not the only way or even the best way it's just the easy way.

Without adiquate front line support you do not want to commit your slowest mechs to a battle line where it will become focused and destroyed easily due to the lack of other top priority targets.

So,instead of playing like you have 3 front line brawlers and getting slagged in seconds try adjusting to incorperate the presence of the LRMs.When you have more LRMs than brawlers your strategy is now an LRM centric one if you want to win.

Trying to use techniques for mechs you DO NOT HAVE will fail. Tring to make the LRM assaults into assault brawlers WILL FAIL!

Adapt to what you have and persevere. That is the true challenge

The problem with changing to a LRM centric strategy is that LRMs are most effective at 300-500 meters, not 1000. Also, if you start lobbing LRMs the enemy team will then bring the fight to you, in which case the disadvantage of having so many LRM mechs will immediately become evident.

Another issue that sometimes gets overlooked is that while LRMs are pretty effective against newer players, starting in the mid tiers pilot's start to figure out that LRMs can't do enough damage to an assault to put them in mortal danger (unless they are barfed in the open or something). I'm not saying don't play with LRMs, I'm saying if you use an assault, understand that if you aren't near the front line you are robbing your team of armor at the point of attack. And once the enemy team finishes off the front line mechs, your LRM boat is just a sitting duck.

While I can appreciate and relate to your desire to find new and innovative ways to play the game, the sad truth is that this game just isn't that deep. It is always better to take the high ground; it is always better to seize initiative and apply pressure on the enemy team. It is always better for assaults to be at or near the tip of the spear,where they can tank damage and rotate with other assaults in a way the other weight classes cant.

[Escef]

OrmsbyGore, on 14 October 2017 - 01:48 PM, said:

Also, if you start lobbing LRMs the enemy team will then bring the fight to you, ...

Maybe in the group queue, in the solo queue they just camp cover or run away.

[OrmsbyGore]

Escef, on 14 October 2017 - 02:21 PM, said:

Maybe in the group queue, in the solo queue they just camp cover or run away.

Some, but it seems silly to count on the enemy making a mistake. Initiative is important

[Escef]

OrmsbyGore, on 14 October 2017 - 08:59 PM, said:

Some, but it seems silly to count on the enemy making a mistake. Initiative is important

It is. Maybe you don't understand it because you don't play solo queue much? I can't tell you how often I see people play like they want to lose. It boggles the mind.

[Lykaon]

OrmsbyGore, on 14 October 2017 - 01:48 PM, said:

The problem with changing to a LRM centric strategy is that LRMs are most effective at 300-500 meters, not 1000. Also, if you start lobbing LRMs the enemy team will then bring the fight to you, in which case the disadvantage of having so many LRM mechs will immediately become evident.

500m is half a bloody kilometer!

So an LRM centric tactic would be...

Place your LRM carriers at least 200m apart,keep them mid formation If the LRM carriers come under attack each is far enough from the other to fire on their counter parts attacker and vise versa.

If you play LRM carriers often LEARN HOW TO DO THIS! it will save your mech and frequently your team mates.

Every time I run up on a couple of LRM boats that are so close together that I can get under both of their min. range I wonder why the obvious wasn't done.

And this is tactic is obvious!

OrmsbyGore, on 14 October 2017 - 08:59 PM, said:

Some, but it seems silly to count on the enemy making a mistake. Initiative is important

They always make mistakes in quick play. Recognizing them and executing actions to exploit the mistakes is the tough part.

The reasons for why there are always mistakes made is also what makes it difficult to exploit those mistakes.

Lack of communication and co-ordination.

Edited by Lykaon, 15 October 2017 - 12:46 AM.

[Brain Cancer]

Lykaon, on 15 October 2017 - 12:46 AM, said:

500m is half a bloody kilometer!

And this matters to the guy firing effectively instant-hit lasers and ballistics why, other than a bit of damage reduction on the smaller ones?

Range matters to LRMs because their velocity is so low, 500m is about three seconds of travel time from launcher to target, AFTER you took the time to lock-on. I've popped out, put full heavy laser burns into a lurmboat, and gotten back into cover at 500m before a single missile reached me.

In my Supernova. It's one of the reasons I keep mentioning velocity is the gold standard for LRMs, as it directly goes to accuracy and as a sideboost, degrades AMS effectiveness.

[OrmsbyGore]

Escef, on 15 October 2017 - 12:45 AM, said:

It is. Maybe you don't understand it because you don't play solo queue much? I can't tell you how often I see people play like they want to lose. It boggles the mind.

I play solo queue almost exclusively, so I understand how common it is. That's why I will always oppose that kind of passive play; I'm sure you can imagine how many times I've dropped in a brawlerish atlas or cyclops only to have my team sit around in one spot tickling the enemy with lasers at almost max range. Almost without fail we get pushed and and surrounded. Only thing that makes me angrier is playing on hpg and having my team NASCAR blindly from the start while the enemy team takes the tip and pushes over to crush the assaults.

But we can do something about it. Get on go up and encourage the team to push; be a proactive drop caller and get the team moving towards the advantageous positions, forming a during line, etc.

[OrmsbyGore]

Lykaon, on 15 October 2017 - 12:46 AM, said:

500m is half a bloody kilometer!

So an LRM centric tactic would be...

Place your LRM carriers at least 200m apart,keep them mid formation If the LRM carriers come under attack each is far enough from the other to fire on their counter parts attacker and vise versa.

If you play LRM carriers often LEARN HOW TO DO THIS! it will save your mech and frequently your team mates.

Every time I run up on a couple of LRM boats that are so close together that I can get under both of their min. range I wonder why the obvious wasn't done.

And this is tactic is obvious!



They always make mistakes in quick play. Recognizing them and executing actions to exploit the mistakes is the tough part.

The reasons for why there are always mistakes made is also what makes it difficult to exploit those mistakes.

Lack of communication and co-ordination.

Or you could use direct fire weapons to deal damage much more quickly and effectively, without having ecm and AMS render you ineffective. Or even bring LRMs if you must, but move WITH the team so you can share armor when necessary, especially in an assault or heavy.

[Escef]

OrmsbyGore, on 16 October 2017 - 05:00 AM, said:

But we can do something about it. Get on go up and encourage the team to push; be a proactive drop caller and get the team moving towards the advantageous positions, forming a during line, etc.

I try. Doesn't often work, but it's a thing of beauty when a team gets aggressive.

[mogs01gt]

Joey Tankblaster, on 09 October 2017 - 07:10 AM, said:

Ok gents,
this is not a rant about LURMs in general but more a rant about LURM pilots. The whole buddy lock feature in MWO is really painful and nonsense from a game design perspective.
I just hate those LURM pilots who do not share their armour, intel and firepower with their team in a meaningful way.
We already have lock after direct sighting, TAG-laser, UAVs and NARC. This is enough. I really don't see the necessity to promote a playstyle which favours cowardeous hidding in the third row waiting for others to do the job (e.g. locking up targets).
Buddy lock destroys role warfare. Lights on a scouting mission just get cought by an enemy light, locked up and lurmed to death. It's senseless.
What is the point of this design? I am fine with a substantial buff for LURMs if buddy lock is removed.
Get rid of buddy lock ASAP.
My 2 cents

How are you tier1 and you do not realize that is specifically the issues with LRMs? They are vastly outgun by every other long range weapon in the game. They require locks to function and this also allows brawlers to function as well. They provide cover.