8
I have not read many of the other comments here yet and feel kind'a pressured to write something now instead of waiting to sort out my thoughts as, at least last time, the Thread was locked as soon as the PTR was over, giving no time to contemplate one's thoughts and sort one's opinions... so here's my Take on the PTR / LRM flight path changes:
Regarding the Flight path:
Let me start by stating that I really like LRM's... not because they are effective or anything but because I Like the high flying arc. If there were manually aimed mortars/arcing MRM's or something along those lines available I'd use those, but sadly LRM's are the only weapon with this kind of 'ballistic'-ish flight path.
I find that seeing Artillery volleys and such fly is somewhat fascinating, and even in MW5 the seemingly even slower LRM's in high flight path just look awesome, especially against the sun and the like with the god rays around them etc etc!
So I have a dislike for the automatically lower flight path already due to the visual appearance... it's just not as good looking.
(And LRM's can already be used below the Platform on Crimson and such if you just gauge the distances correctly)
I also like LRM's as they require a lot of Map-knowledge to be used correctly, making them a easy to handle, hard to master Weapon system.
Yes, I use LRM' boats (with machine guns and lasers as 'back up' weapons somewhat frequently but I do usually get my own locks.
My main one (Scorch, with 4xlrm20 + Artemis, 2x MPL + 2x Machine guns as precise finishers) has seen 285 Games in that configuration with an average of 715 Damage and K/D of 2 as well as a 1.59 Win Rate! I have to do something right I'd assume...
(And I've exclusively played it in Tier 1 exclusively and usually solo or group quere - Quick Play, just in case someone intends to comment on this)
Using LRM's and getting one's own locks is already really effective and while I've tried switching to ATM's when they came out it's just not fun with that puny low flight path that can't even shoot someone that's retreating behind a hill on Polar (at least when used in closer ranges as that's where I tend to be).
I always assumed LRM's exist to force engagements (as waiting it out is being made suboptimal if the enemy effectively uses them) and and that's what they excel at.
Playing close to the front/sharing armor seeing where people are and such are already massively effective... if you learn how to use Missiles effectively, instead of just locking and firing on whatever red square is available as many people seemingly tend to do!
I've been on the PTR and the lower flight path of the LRM's has similar issues, making them less effective against targets that I know will be behind cover in half a second, but the missiles decide they will fly the direct path instead as they only see how it is right now in this very moment.
I also find that, if it's toggleable, maybe the lower path should be equivalent to that of the current ATM's so they're actually useable in more locations as it currently barely is improved in regards to hitting roofs, especially against bigger mechs. (Crimson's Tunnel for example. It's already possible to use LRM's under the Platform on live if you just learn the consistent flight behaviour of LRM's so that area I don't see as an improvement)
The automatic change also makes LRM's them the least consistent Weapon system and it's irritating, especially on shorter ranges(!), no matter what advantages the lower path may have on a level(elevation-wise), hill-less playing field or longer distances.
If this is supposed to be the default behaviour I'd really want a toggle to switch between this and 'classic' higher flight paths (and optionally force lower aswell) and at the very least an indicator that shows where they'll fly before I fire them.
While I do appreciate a lower flight path as voluntary OPTION, if the current changes go to live as it is I will be using LRM's LESS at the front, and will be more inclined to use non-own locks as that is the least frustrating.
And therefore at least for someone who uses LRM's on a regular basis, the Intentions do to match the current (PTR) implementation.
- I dislike the re-locking (short missile lock loss) that's happening when loosing direct line of sight as it makes missiles miss that shouldn't and due to the frustration arising from this might encourage people to not even lock themselves in the first place. This is a major drawback of the current implementation and I sincerely hope it's a bug.
- Sensor (Range) integration
I like that sensor Range gets more relevant in sensor related things (where it makes sense) and I generally like Info-Warfare.
- Missile health/AMS
I do not like the inconsistency in AMS behaviour introduced due to differing Missile health.
On Live it's much more comprehensible. If missiles come My AMS can block X amount of LRM's/ATM's/MRM's and half of that for all short range ones given a similar travel distance.
It might just encourage people to switch to mechs with 9lrm 5's (fired in salvoes of 4 each) instead of using 2 lrm 20's, not solving any issue at all.
I regularly Play Kit-Fox and Wolfhound with 2-3 AMS, using AMS and 'Range' skills that already neuters many missile salvoes, taking out hundreds if not thousands of Missiles per match (depending on presence). This doesn't really need a buff, especially if more people used AMS and especially since there now are mechs with up to 4 AMS slots available.
I think the best way to 'buff' AMS and and cooperation would be to not change AMS at all but instead, in addition to match score and Damage, show a numerical value for 'Team assist' or similar that gets higher the more ECM coverage was given to allies, ecm disrupted on enemies, heat given to enemies (flamers), Missiles destroyed (AMS), Tag/Narc duration on enemies, with bigger bonuses if they are fired at by allies (no matter whether lock on or not), or 'holding locks'/scouting (both uav and via mech),...
All of these help winning, but so far rewards are mostly based on damage. Changing the Rewards and NOTION of certain actions might help furthering cooperation, instead of just pushing for max damage.
People generally want to optimise/maximise their performance. Currently the game interface nudges players towards just maximum damage. (although the past integration of Missile destroyed in to match score is welcome, most people still measure performance in just plain 'Damage'-dealt)
Pilots need to understand that NOT carrying a ton of AMS+Ammo is just as much of a player chosen tradeoff as not carrying full armor on a component somewhere. And positive reinforcement is usually preferred so bigger numbers that are publicly shown might be enough for people's subconscious to at least care a bit more about those choices.
Another thought that came up:
Why isn't any dynamic Missile behaviour part of Artemis (exclusively)? (or optionally: The ability to manually toggle flight paths should at least exist with artemis)
And if it applies to Artemis it should apply to ATM's aswell. As currently no one is (reasonably) wasting heat/ammo on targets outside of SRM Range with them as they can't even cross tree-stumps or similar obstacles on Forest and the like as usually combatants aren't on the same elevation and also moving...
Unifying ATM and LRM flight paths also might make it easier for people being shot at to gauge cover/options of avoidance...
So What I'd propose:
- If you implement the lower flightpath in any form: Don't exclusively make it automatic.
Make it a toggle (At least and especially when one uses Artemis to make this an element of Skill) while the default behaviour may stay this way (PTR) if you so desire, although I'd propose to make this part of Artemis exclusively so that it has a visible use and as an offset to it's supposed increased effectiveness against Legs and the like.
- To strengthen AMS and other support systems... Maybe first try to not change them, but instead incentivise players to use what's already there as it's working really well if used properly, even on just one Mech in a Team...
Support Systems are just woefully underused because (I assume) there's no metric to optimise here. Damage is much more easily measurable and, according to the interface Layout, the main focus. Change this.
If just half a Team would elect to use their available full defenses (Armor AND AMS), instead of opting to only optimise for damage, mass Missiles and such would, even in the current implementation of AMS and Missile health, have a hard time ever reaching anyone.
If you want to Incentivise Players to change behaviour... maybe try to actually incentivise that and take away the focus from less important things, also and especially on anything that gives the Player Feedback in numbers!
Edited by Listentome, 11 February 2019 - 10:45 AM.
