Streaks have a very specific role in this game, to be a very easy to use anti-light weapon. They require minimal skill and consequently are a pretty poor weapon outside of their niche (killing lights). The point of streaks is that you are directly trading the ability to do effective damage on heavy targets in exchange for being a hard counter against light mechs. Light mechs have very few options against streak mechs, one of which using ECM and ganging up to prevent locks.
You proposal makes streaks better, which in turn encourages more people to take them, which in turn hurt light mechs which are already the weakest class in the game. That's my primary objection to it.
As you've said there are plenty of ways to counter the ECM issue. If you're boating streaks you absolutely should be taking BAP/Tag/UAV etc. If you aren't boating streaks then you should consider if countering ECM is worth the tonnage or not. It's a mechlab choice. You want a hard counter to light mechs, but you don't want the limitations that come with taking that hard counter. If you just wanted back up weapons you could always take SRMs instead and not have the issue.
ECM (+ ganging up with ECM) is one of the few things light mechs can do to actually counter streaks. LRMs and ATMs have a minimum range so lights can crowd them and the dumbfire isn't a big issue.
Samial, on 04 March 2018 - 10:52 PM, said:
Spheriod, Brain Cancer, EL Bandito, Noni, Champion of Khorne, Unofficial Operator, You and a hoard of others not to mention all the rest condescending everyone who isn't in the cool kids click with stupid memes and worse putting customers down by linking that ******** Jarls list and calling customers potatoes and bads..
Seriously acting like a bunch of 5 year olds when ever anyone asks for changes or brings up balance issues or puts up ideas you people don't agree with..
I don't see much from you either buddy other than putting others down for at least attempting
For every condescending player I see there's at least one like you who has a persecution complex.
You literally came into the thread and posted:
Quote
You don't agree with their BS so you become a target here, just ignore them they aren't worth it. They think they are better than you sad as that is.."
Please tell me, what did that contribute to the discussion? You basically came in trying to pick a fight.
The idea that any new idea is better than no idea is also silly. There are plenty of ideas that get posted by people that don't understand the game that would absolutely make the game worse. Honestly, it would be better if those ideas never got posted at all. Just trying isn't enough, if someone is repeatedly coming up with garbage ideas it's an active detriment and people should be calling for them to stop posting them. To be clear, while I disagree with this proposed change I wouldn't consider it a game breaking or garbage proposal. I'm more referring to things like "Make all weapons auto-aim with lock-on" type ideas.
If the point of forums is discussion isn't telling people what the flaws in their ideas are part of that discussion? Or that you disagree with the idea? The forums aren't meant to be an echo chamber where only positive feedback is provided. Sure, people post things that don't really contribute (kind of like your above comment) and those can derail threads, but just because a lot of the feedback is negative doesn't mean it isn't right.
Also. calling people who disagree with you a "bunch of 5 year olds" really doesn't put you on much higher ground than those posting memes. It's the internet, while it would be great if everyone would be polite the fact is they aren't and it's just foolish to get upset about it.
Samial, on 04 March 2018 - 11:16 PM, said:
Nope its very much personal attacks.
Any time I see someone complaining about the Jarl's List I can almost guarantee that their stats are poor. Similarly, a hidden tier is another good indicator.
Your stats are below average at this game, that pretty much means by definition that you are bad. By itself It's not condescending or insulting to say that, it's just a fact. You can either accept it and just play to have fun or you can put in the work to get better. Regardless, your stats are a quantifiable indicator of your competence at the game and in situations where your competence is important people absolutely have a right to call you out on it.
People can attack your competence in the game without attacking you personally and if you can't separate the two the problem is on your end not theirs.
Quote
You skill level in a game has zero to do a forum, just because someones not very good does not mean they can't see issues with a fracking game..
This is a point that I see a lot and it's off base. Being good at the game doesn't automatically mean that you understand the issues it has, similarly being bad at the game doesn't automatically mean you're clueless to the issues. That said, a good player has demonstrated that they understand how to fully utilize the games systems where a bad player has not shown their competence.
A great example of this is the LRM debate that pops up over and over. I've seen two threads on the same page one saying "LRMs are OP" and the other saying "LRMs are UP".
The problem is that for players that aren't good at using cover and don't have as good of a grasp on the counters, LRMs can indeed be overpowered. If you don't know the map and walk out into the open in an assault you can be dead in seconds without being able to do anything.
That said, for good players who either bring the counters or more commonly just use terrain and tactics, LRMs really aren't that good of a weapon and are easily dealt with. They end up being a weak weapon system compared to the other options available. That said the "good" player will usually understand how LRMs can be effective/OP in certain situations, but the "bad" player is unlikely to understand how easily LRMs can be countered.
A good player is more likely to see and understand issues than a bad one. That's why Proton is going to get listened to before you in a balance discussion, he's demonstrated his competence where you have not. Proton is effectively an "expert" on the subject.
It's like comparing a civil engineer to a high school kid who build a model bridge. You're going to trust the engineer's opinion on bridges unless the highschooler can put force strong evidence to support their position.
In the same way, if you have poor stats in the game the onus is on you to demonstrate that you know what you are talking about when it comes to an issue, not on the rest of the forums to disprove the position that you put out. Given two sides without numbers/evidence to back up their position the correct call is to listen to the side with more experience, in this case the players with better stats.
tl;dr
If you have poor stats the burden of proof is on you, not on the people saying your idea is bad.
The GaussFather, on 05 March 2018 - 02:19 PM, said:
So guys, I'm thinking you are being pretty hard on Samiel, somehow he's the black sheep that everyone is trying to coach? Oh I get it, all those suggestions weren't really coaching, they were more like backseat driving or something? Have you guys actually tried to help him or is it just a "figure of speech"? "Wallow in his inability to get better."
I have to remember that one next time I'm coaching football: Hey kid, stop wallowing in your inability to get better and listen to me because I tired of repeating that you are stupid and hopeless. Shape up or you are off the team! -- Great coaching!
It's no one on the forums responsibility to coach a player. It would be one thing if he came to the forums and asked for help. I've yet to see a player who is genuinely asking for help and trying to get better receive anything other than helpful feedback. No one is putting those players down.
Where you do see stats brought up in a negative fashion is when players with poor stats try to weigh in on balance decisions and start arguing with players with good stats. It's fine to share your perspective from where you are as a player in a balance discussion. When you start trying to tell the football team that using a basketball free throw to pass the ball is a good idea and that just because you don't have good QB stats doesn't mean you don't know what you're talking about you're absolutely going to call that player out on it.
If that player complains that other people are bullying them because no one listens to their ideas and they tell them they are bad what are you going to do as a coach? Are you going to reprimand the rest of the team or are you going to tell that player they are wrong and that they should listen to the other players on the team?
4
