Snowbluff, on 22 March 2018 - 07:29 AM, said:
I have been bringing a NARC for the last 20 matches to test it out. I do carry UAVs. I do spot for missiles. When I'm not doing these things, I'm bringing a power, direct fire focused build that simply has to carry the LRMers. Having done the NARC role, I can say HPG is actually really good for LRMs if you can keep your enemies out of the basement or off the top, as the lines of the ramps don't make for good cover.
In short, you're full of it, almost as much as blood4blood. He may have a personal preference for the map, but that's the real anecdotal evidence.
"Simply the case" is a statement of absolute fact without supporting data. I do agree it's a smart move to vote for Polar Highlands if you are using an LRM boat however, it is easily observable and recordable to see that maps like HPG are selected with a significantly higher frequency than Polar for the same reasons by players using non LRM centric builds (brawlers want small cover choked maps) .
Yet the opposite point of view would be shot down with exstensive levels of salt and vitriol.
If I dropped a post on the forum that stated that I play an LRM boat and feel it's neccissary for brawlers to hold locks for me and deploy UAVs and NARCs on densely covered maps because brawlers purposely select dense covered maps to support their play styles to the detriment of LRM use I would be flamed into the ground for it.
And oddly enough,this scenario is far more common than landing on polar highlands with an opfor that includes a dedicated NARCer and heavy LRM use that isn't also not Incursion (global ECM available) or Escort (uncounterable ECM towers available).
As I see it I already have it pretty easy as a brawler centric play style pilot. Map selection is more frequently in my favor I don't have to jump through hoops to squeeze basic functionality out of my weapons like LRMs need and there is no passive hard counter to a bullet in face like there are for LRMs.
If one in ten matches I need to maybe think about LRMs actually being a potential threat rather than a free kill for me I'm fine with it. I just know that when the map is favorable to LRMs I can no longer just passively go about my business dispite LRM pressence (like I can on most maps with ample cover) I need to pay attention to LRMs as an actual threat and take action to minimize that threat.
Asking a pilot of an LRM boat to strap on an AMS in addition to BAPs and Artemis and TAGs and bucket loads of ammo is further burdening an already taxed specialist build that most of the time ends up playing on maps selected for how they favor other play styles over LRM use.
And as for being NARCed on Polar. You can do quite a bit yourself.
Have your own AMS since NARC is a slow moving missile and is effected by AMS. It will do you no good at all if that LRM boat teammate is 300m behind you has AMS if a NARC is fired at you. And It will do you no good at all if that LRM boat teammate isn't within AMS range of you (and they won't be most of the time) when the missiles target you because you are NARCed.
The players you need to be asking to help out when the match is Polar and the opfor has NARC and LRMs are your team's fast attack mechs. It's not a Lurmboat's job to chase down fast skirmishers shooting NARCs it's your team's fast attack mechs that should be doing that.
You have mentioned you are using an Arcticwolf with a NARC on it. Well guess what? If the bad guys have a dedicated NARCer your Arctic Wolf may want to stick a NARC on the enemy NARCer, When that happens THEN it becomes the LRM boat's job to take out the enemy NARCs.
Until that happens you are asking a player with the least effective means of attacking a fast moving target to deploy defense/offense against those types of targets.