68 replies to this topic

[GweNTLeR]

As a person who playes FW often I just realised a way to make it a much better place:
GIVE DROPSHIPS LURMS.
You might ask yourself: dafaq is this guy smoking? But it actually makes a lot of sense.
1. There will be no more spawn camping. Lurms mostly fly over walls and those crying about spawn camping would be happy.
2. No more hatred towards lurmers (rockets will be everywhere, even without them), hence much less toxic behavior, would definitely make more players pleased.
3. Visual satisfaction from lurms in the sky. Seriously, I find flying missiles in the sky beautiful.
4. It is lore.
5. Instead of just KILLING mechs (like the current dropships do with their LPLs), LRM will cripple mechs(due to high spread), allowing the defending team to finish off crippled mechs, which would result in better K/D of defenders and hence, better mood of defenders. That is actually VERY important.
….
Post more reasons below, I'll add them later.

Edited by GweNTLeR, 06 January 2019 - 11:39 PM.

[Nick 2008]

Yeah! Need more lurmz !

[Nathan White]

GweNTLeR, on 06 January 2019 - 04:05 AM, said:

As a person who playes FW often I just realised a way to make it a much better place:
GIVE DROPSHIPS LURMS.
You might ask yourself: dafaq is this guy smoking? But it actually makes a lot of sense.
1. There will be no more spawn camping. Lurms mostly fly over walls and those crying about spawn camping would be happy.
2. No more hatred towards lurmers (rockets will be everywhere, even without them), hence much less toxic behavior, would definitely make more players pleased.
3. Visual satisfaction from lurms in the sky. Seriously, I find flying missiles in the sky beautiful.
4. It is lore.
….
Post more reasons below, I'll add them later.

I am already love Caustic Valley after this changes!

[Tarl Cabot]

Turrets used to fire LRMS but where removed because they acted just like those LRM assaults that stayed in the rear... and this was in QP too.

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 06 January 2019 - 05:28 AM.

[G A N O N]

Ok, fair enough. Why not add the ability to shoot down dropships? May add a bit of fun!

[SCUD303]

Hmmmm..... now my imagination is running away with me! What about mechs being able to jump from dropships anywhere on the map like in PUBG. This will rule out any form of spawn camping!

Edited by SCUD303, 06 January 2019 - 08:58 AM.

[denAirwalkerrr]

Give them long tom.

[Tarl Cabot]

G A N O N, on 06 January 2019 - 06:57 AM, said:

Ok, fair enough. Why not add the ability to shoot down dropships? May add a bit of fun!

Issues with that is that the dropships are not really there. In fact, when PGI added them one could target and damage the mechs in the dropships.

And do not forget Incursion where one side can order an attacking dropship onto their opponent's base.

[Yondu Udonta]

What about the overlord dropship weapon systems from MW4? Give them headshotting capabilities.

[HammerMaster]

Or MAYBE you could read the TRO and load the Canon load out!?

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Leopard

Armament
2 x PPCs
3 x LRM-20s
7 x Medium Lasers
5 x Large Lasers

Even better


http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Union

Armament

3 x PPCs
6 x AC/5s
6 x LRM-20s
12 x Medium Lasers
5 x Large Lasers

Everytime pgi eschews lore and ignores source material.
A Tetatae dies.

Edited by HammerMaster, 06 January 2019 - 12:40 PM.

[Spheroid]

Is this a serious post? I hope not. If you believe that it will stop spawn camping in any meaningful way I can easily describe in a paragraph why your underlying thesis is flawed.

The act of spawn camping is a larger number of mechs attacking and killing a lesser number of mechs to enact a attrition advantage that alters the outcome of the match. It seldom is a group of attackers ignoring the defense provided by the large lasers of dropships. More often than not the large lasers of the dropship are a non-factor. A dropship is perhaps on the scene for 15 seconds. During that fifteen seconds the attackers can avail themselves of local cover or that provided by the dropzone walls. This cover works against lasers or missiles.

Additionally unlike lasers there are further defenses against missiles in he form of AMS or stealth. If anything lurms would be less effective weapons than the existing lasers. If I am camping you with dual AMS crabs the number missiles needed to break through would be substantial. If I am camping you with stealth Fleas or Javelins the missile damage drops to zero. Because of the problem of balancing average dropship TTK lurms are never an appropriate defense weapon. The outcome is too inconsistent next to the behavior of large lasers.

Given the futility of the proposed changes why waste anyone's time with this proposal?

[HammerMaster]

Spheroid, on 06 January 2019 - 01:08 PM, said:

Is this a serious post? I hope not. If you believe that it will stop spawn camping in any meaningful way I can easily describe in a paragraph why your underlying thesis is flawed.

The act of spawn camping is a larger number of mechs attacking and killing a lesser number of mechs to enact a attrition advantage that alters the outcome of the match. It seldom is a group of attackers ignoring the defense provided by the large lasers of dropships. More often than not the large lasers of the dropship are a non-factor. A dropship is perhaps on the scene for 15 seconds. During that fifteen seconds the attackers can avail themselves of local cover or that provided by the dropzone walls. This cover works against lasers or missiles.

Additionally unlike lasers there are further defenses against missiles in he form of AMS or stealth. If anything lurms would be less effective weapons than the existing lasers. If I am camping you with dual AMS crabs the number missiles needed to break through would be substantial. If I am camping you with stealth Fleas or Javelins the missile damage drops to zero. Because of the problem of balancing average dropship TTK lurms are never an appropriate defense weapon. The outcome is too inconsistent next to the behavior of large lasers.

Given the futility of the proposed changes why waste anyone's time with this proposal?

Such a buzzkill Debbie downer.

Edited by HammerMaster, 06 January 2019 - 01:11 PM.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

Spheroid, on 06 January 2019 - 01:08 PM, said:

Additionally unlike lasers there are further defenses against missiles in he form of AMS or stealth. If anything lurms would be less effective weapons than the existing lasers. If I am camping you with dual AMS crabs the number missiles needed to break through would be substantial. If I am camping you with stealth Fleas or Javelins the missile damage drops to zero. Because of the problem of balancing average dropship TTK lurms are never an appropriate defense weapon. The outcome is too inconsistent next to the behavior of large lasers.

Then give dropships a 500 meter BAP with combi tag or whatever. Also, who said LRM instead of Lasers? Appearently, dropships can be to easily dodged so indirect fire on top of direct fire might help in that matter.
Give it LRM or Streaks with 360° fire, so no more hiding behind a rock.

[HammerMaster]

I still fail to see people taking issue with the stock loadout as there are plenty of large lasers on it.

[dante245]

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

[HammerMaster]

dante245, on 06 January 2019 - 05:01 PM, said:

LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL

A tad more specific please.

[justcallme A S H]

Gwen I am going to track you down on Teamspeak and say lovely things to you in Russian language.

Edited by justcallme A S H, 06 January 2019 - 05:22 PM.

[HammerMaster]

justcallme A S H, on 06 January 2019 - 05:22 PM, said:

Gwen I am going to track you down on Teamspeak and say lovely things to you in Russian language.

Sweet or creepy?

[GweNTLeR]

Spheroid, on 06 January 2019 - 01:08 PM, said:

This cover works against lasers or missiles.

It does work, but many missiles will fly over the walls, since the trajectory is quite curved even when launched from ground (and would be even more curved when launched from airbourne dropship, I expect like 70 degrees angle)

Spheroid, on 06 January 2019 - 01:08 PM, said:

Additionally unlike lasers there are further defenses against missiles in he form of AMS or stealth. If anything lurms would be less effective weapons than the existing lasers. If I am camping you with dual AMS crabs the number missiles needed to break through would be substantial. If I am camping you with stealth Fleas or Javelins the missile damage drops to zero. Because of the problem of balancing average dropship TTK lurms are never an appropriate defense weapon. The outcome is too inconsistent next to the behavior of large lasers.

I never said "LRM instead of lasers".
And actually I think that making people use AMS mechs In game is actually a good thing.

Spoiler

Anyway that is much better than all your proposals
Have some faith in LRM brother ! #PraiseChris

Edited by GweNTLeR, 06 January 2019 - 11:43 PM.

[Roland09]

Spheroid, on 06 January 2019 - 01:08 PM, said:

Additionally unlike lasers there are further defenses against missiles in he form of AMS or stealth. If anything lurms would be less effective weapons than the existing lasers. If I am camping you with dual AMS crabs the number missiles needed to break through would be substantial. If I am camping you with stealth Fleas or Javelins the missile damage drops to zero. Because of the problem of balancing average dropship TTK lurms are never an appropriate defense weapon. The outcome is too inconsistent next to the behavior of large lasers.

Wait, wasn't that the whole idea of the proposal?