64 replies to this topic

[Xulld]

IMHO . . . strikes make MWO even more boring than it already is with its long loading screens and forcing you to play on maps you would otherwise never play...

You get into a game and are all amped up to shoot some mechs you spent a ton of time working on your build that probably does not work that great on this map or is another one of a thousand generalist builds that is basically good at medium range . . .. boooooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrriiiiiiiiing . . . . . . . . . . and you know that being aggressive and taking good positions is important and bam. You get hit by strike after strike and are at 40% before the game really gets going and everyone knows how frequent strikes are and indeed we know how frequent bottle necks occur and people throw blind strikes now even....


BOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRING.


As my title says . . . I think you can either have effective strikes . . which discourage aggressive and therefor fun gameplay . . . or you can have useless strikes... you cannot have both..


This game is already super boring because of the map/match/build system being so limited... why make it worse with something that is not even really about stompy robits at all?

I hate strikes and think they should be completely removed from the game....

Edited by Xulld, 04 November 2018 - 03:16 AM.

[El Bandito]

Strikes can be useful in breaking up static formation, so it could stay ONLY if there is real tonnage and slot sacrifices to use them.

I hate the current pay to have an advantage form of strikes, as it further creates a gap between those who got hundreds of millions of spare C-Bills, and those who are still grinding.

That goes double for Coolshots.

Edited by El Bandito, 04 November 2018 - 05:11 AM.

[Tiewolf]

In its current form consumables are a bad and unbalanced game feature. Like El Bandito already explained, it favors seasoned cbill millionaires and they have no downsides spamming them all day. Even the arguments pro strikes are fishy because the same players that argue that they are there to break up formations, try to place strikes in a way that the enemy can't see them. If it would be true that they use it as area denial they would want everybody to see the red smoke.

Consumables should be restricted and used in a way that does not favor a certain player base. But we had these arguments over and over again. Even though it cripples mainly new players Pgi won't change it anyway.

Edited by Tiewolf, 04 November 2018 - 04:17 AM.

[Asym]

El Bandito, on 04 November 2018 - 03:29 AM, said:

Strikes can be useful in breaking up static formation, so it could stay ONLY if there is real tonnage and slot sacrifices to use them.

I hate the current pay to have an advantage form of strikes, as it further creates a gap between those who got hundreds of millions of spare C-Bills, and those who are still grinding.

That goes double for Coolshots.

P2A?

The entire freaking skill tree is P2A??? Start with a less than combat ready mech and get abused, say, for 200 games and the only remediation is another P2A called Premium Time....

And, we wonder why MWO is a grave yard..... Stupid is as stupid does me thinks and ANYONE with one half a brain knew that the skill trees were outright a bad idea for retention: after all what military would issue "export quality" vehicles to new soldiers??? The answer is: ZERO. The skill trees should have been for advancements beyond first rate combatants.... For the neat stuff, the stuff that adds to those unique vehicle skills................not P2A just to buy back say, the range of the LRM's the mech comes with???? Good grief.

[K O Z A K]

Exactly the opposite. Strikes are used to stop you from slow trading with high alpha from that static poking position. If you really play agressively you might eat 1-2 strikes, if you play passively your team could eat up to 24 strikes

[Phoolan Devi]

Asym, on 04 November 2018 - 05:55 AM, said:

P2A?

The entire freaking skill tree is P2A??? Start with a less than combat ready mech and get abused, say, for 200 games and the only remediation is another P2A called Premium Time....

And, we wonder why MWO is a grave yard..... Stupid is as stupid does me thinks and ANYONE with one half a brain knew that the skill trees were outright a bad idea for retention: after all what military would issue "export quality" vehicles to new soldiers??? The answer is: ZERO. The skill trees should have been for advancements beyond first rate combatants.... For the neat stuff, the stuff that adds to those unique vehicle skills................not P2A just to buy back say, the range of the LRM's the mech comes with???? Good grief.

Dude, we get it! You hate the skill tree for whatever reasons.....it might be just reasons.

What in the world does that have to do with strikes who have been there before thw skill tree?

Btw, if you play with a new mech, save up, get to know it. When you have the amount of, say, 20-30 nodes, you can start skilling it. Even better, play it until you got the xp and c-bills for all 91 nodes. You'll feel the change then and if you rocked in it unskilled, you'll do amazing when skilled!


Get over it.....the skill tree is going to stay and it is good that way. That old system was a piece of crap compared to what we have now!

[tutzdes]

Tiewolf, on 04 November 2018 - 04:16 AM, said:

Even the arguments pro strikes are fishy because the same players that argue that they are there to break up formations, try to place strikes in a way that the enemy can't see them. If it would be true that they use it as area denial they would want everybody to see the red smoke.

"Stealth" strike is more effective at breaking formations than "red smoke". It makes people panic, causes confusion and forces people to turn around searching for a strike user. Same thing as a land mine: it is much more effective as an area denial tool if you don't know where it is exactly. Red smoke is only good for stalling the enemy advance for several seconds. A couple of strikes that hit are way more effective for disrupting the static firing line than several smokes you can avoid easily while keeping the cohesion and facing the enemy.

Removing the strikes (and/or UAVs) would require a massive buff to the light mechs as it is the class that benefits the most from those (and the worst performing one).

[Mystere]

Xulld, on 04 November 2018 - 03:15 AM, said:

BOOOOOOOOOOOOORRRRRRRRRRRRING.

Remove the red smoke from strikes -- and the early warning signals for LRMs -- and things will get much much more exciting. <maniacal >

tutzdes, on 04 November 2018 - 07:07 AM, said:

"Stealth" strike is more effective at breaking formations than "red smoke". It makes people panic, causes confusion and forces people to turn around searching for a strike user. Same thing as a land mine: it is much more effective as an area denial tool if you don't know where it is exactly. Red smoke is only good for stalling the enemy advance for several seconds. A couple of strikes that hit are way more effective for disrupting the static firing line than several smokes you can avoid easily while keeping the cohesion and facing the enemy.

Amen.

[Novakaine]

Air strike and lurm barrages - brilliant.

[Shifty McSwift]

I have debated this in the past, but my main points come down to, if you want strikes to actually be used like a weapon and pad damage scores, then just make them a weapon (with weight and crit space), but if you want them to work as actual area control mechanics, they need to change them to be more obvious, a marker on the map is the main one, but also a warning like betty saying "incoming strike". Before you tell me that nerfs them and nobody will use them, that's wrong, the point of area control is to make people move or at least heavily consider moving or taking a decent slap, so you would up the damage and range of them at the same time.

[Khobai]

The problem with strikes is how ubiquitous they are. Allowing every mech to carry 2 strikes was completely dumb. Even allowing 1 strike per mech was too much IMO.

I like the idea of just getting rid of ALL consumables and replacing them with a strategic asset system instead, where each team gets a shared pool of points they can spend to deploy strategic assets (strikes, UAVs, etc...) during the game. And strikes would no longer contribute to personal damage.

Edited by Khobai, 04 November 2018 - 10:11 AM.

[Shifty McSwift]

Khobai, on 04 November 2018 - 10:08 AM, said:

The problem with strikes is how ubiquitous they are. Allowing every mech to carry 2 strikes was completely dumb. Even allowing 1 strike per mech was too much IMO.

I like the idea of just getting rid of ALL consumables and replacing them with a strategic asset system instead, where each team gets a shared pool of points they can spend to deploy strategic assets during the game.

And/Or relegating certain things like that to certain classes, like in particular scout type lights getting access to strikes (or the best strikes), while weapons platform style assaults get access to the best or most effective coolshots, that could be interesting too, either way having them as free purchasable things that take no space has always seemed a little off to me.

[Tiewolf]

tutzdes, on 04 November 2018 - 07:07 AM, said:

"Stealth" strike is more effective at breaking formations than "red smoke". It makes people panic, causes confusion and forces people to turn around searching for a strike user. Same thing as a land mine: it is much more effective as an area denial tool if you don't know where it is exactly. Red smoke is only good for stalling the enemy advance for several seconds. A couple of strikes that hit are way more effective for disrupting the static firing line than several smokes you can avoid easily while keeping the cohesion and facing the enemy.

Removing the strikes (and/or UAVs) would require a massive buff to the light mechs as it is the class that benefits the most from those (and the worst performing one).

Why should anyone move after a stealth strike hits? You are save as long as the cooldown ticks! Sorry but thats exactly the line of fake arguments that strike spammers come up with to justify their toys.

I am with you concerning light mechs and consumables/strikes. Even though there would be no solution for the c-billionairs vs. the new player disadvantage I think that light mechs should be able to field strikes and multiple UAVs. Coolshots should be removed from the game entirely because they are just P2 alpha twice.


P.S.: If you don`t know that you are in a minefield, you do not slow down till you know or maybe you will never know because no one steped on a mine. Stealth threats are never a good tactic, if you want to denial an area. You want the enemy to know so they can fear the threat or in MWO terms to let them see the red smoke. Stealth strikes are just a P2 deal more damage or P2 increase your chance to win a game.

Edited by Tiewolf, 04 November 2018 - 11:33 AM.

[Aiden Skye]

I would rather have no strikes in the game at all.

[Vxheous]

Tiewolf, on 04 November 2018 - 11:20 AM, said:

Why should anyone move after a stealth strike hits? You are save as long as the cooldown ticks! Sorry but thats exactly the line of fake arguments that strike spammers come up with to justify their toys.

I am with you concerning light mechs and consumables/strikes. Even though there would be no solution for the c-billionairs vs. the new player disadvantage I think that light mechs should be able to field strikes and multiple UAVs. Coolshots should be removed from the game entirely because they are just P2 alpha twice.


P.S.: If you don`t know that you are in a minefield, you do not slow down till you know or maybe you will never know because no one steped on a mine. Stealth threats are never a good tactic, if you want to denial an area. You want the enemy to know so they can fear the threat or in MWO terms to let them see the red smoke. Stealth strikes are just a P2 deal more damage or P2 increase your chance to win a game.

And that type of thinking is why there are people that eat strikes down to 40% without ever firing a shot. Get striked once, shame on you, get striked twice, shame on me for not moving, strike me three times, I'm a potato. You should always expect that the opposing team will have strikes and be prepared for it, because it's in the game, which makes your "don't know that you're in a minefield" not apply. I always scan the horizon for incoming planes and position appropriately to avoid the airstrike. If I make a good trade from cover, I reposition slightly just to make sure that if they drop an artillery strike on me, it'll be minimal hit, if not completely avoided. I watch for strikes elsewhere on the field so I have an idea of the time window for a possible next strike against my team. All of this constitutes game/map awareness, a lot of which many players lack.

Edited by Vxheous, 04 November 2018 - 12:03 PM.

[Shifty McSwift]

Vxheous, on 04 November 2018 - 12:03 PM, said:

And that type of thinking is why there are people that eat strikes down to 40% without ever firing a shot. Get striked once, shame on you, get striked twice, shame on me for not moving, strike me three times, I'm a potato. You should always expect that the opposing team will have strikes and be prepared for it, because it's in the game, which makes your "don't know that you're in a minefield" not apply. I always scan the horizon for incoming planes and position appropriately to avoid the airstrike. If I make a good trade from cover, I reposition slightly just to make sure that if they drop an artillery strike on me, it'll be minimal hit, if not completely avoided. I watch for strikes elsewhere on the field so I have an idea of the time window for a possible next strike against my team. All of this constitutes game/map awareness, a lot of which many players lack.

His point wasn't that you shouldn't move, the point was that if you do get hit by a strike that you didn't see coming, there is no impetus to then immediately move, the main effect has already hit you and another won't happen for at least the length of the cooldown. The area control effect is lost in that instance, it is just extra damage being dealt, and yes you can blame situational awareness to a degree, but "hiding" smoke is definitely possible and the above scenario isn't rare even with a team on the move, particularly if the strike user has some skill with it.

[Vxheous]

Shifty McSwift, on 04 November 2018 - 12:09 PM, said:

His point wasn't that you shouldn't move, the point was that if you do get hit by a strike that you didn't see coming, there is no impetus to then immediately move, the main effect has already hit you and another won't happen for at least the length of the cooldown. The area control effect is lost in that instance, it is just extra damage being dealt, and yes you can blame situational awareness to a degree, but "hiding" smoke is definitely possible and the above scenario isn't rare even with a team on the move, particularly if the strike user has some skill with it.

Avoiding strikes is also a skill, even with "hidden" smoke

[Prototelis]

If you pay enough attention to know where engagements typically take place, then you already know the best places to "hide" smoke.

[Shifty McSwift]

Vxheous, on 04 November 2018 - 12:19 PM, said:

Avoiding strikes is also a skill, even with "hidden" smoke

And that has little to nothing to do with the point that it is common, when hit by a strike, which may itself not be a common occurrence, but still, when it happens, it is often one you didn't see coming, which negates the idea of it being area control, the person hit knows their position is compromised, if they didn't already, and that a potential strike after the cooldown could happen again, but these are all the same effects achieved by regular scouting and generic weapons. If strikes are supposed to function differently they should, or in my opinion, they should embrace the level of skill involved in using smoke called air strikes and just make them a weapon choice.

[Prototelis]

Except that no one has claimed that strikes are exclusively for area control, in the same way that UAVs are not exclusively used to give sandbagging lrm boats leech locks.