274 replies to this topic

[Tesunie]

Prototelis, on 06 March 2019 - 10:21 PM, said:

Oh okay, here is the context;

None of what you're arguing supports the "auto-aim has to be strong for the disabled" argument.

If you noticed, I never actually supported that. I'm just saying the comparison of "this guy does well despite X disability means you guys have no excuse", which isn't exactly a fair statement.

On notation of homing weapons (I mean... "aim assist"), it's how we get effectively get indirect fire into this game. As LRMs are able to perform indirect fire, there is little other choice BUT to have them have some element of homing.

I like LRMs for their utility. I like being able to assist on targets I can't see yet someone else can, at least until I can get to see them. I like to be able to shoot at targets, despite some allies in front of my mech blocking a safe shot, till I can acquire a safe firing lane to use. I like the option, when I'm heavily damaged and another hit is likely to drop me, to be able to fall back into the team and attack from indirect to try and produce that little bit more damage to help the team effort (because by that point, I've done what armor sharing I can effectively do).

[FRAGTAST1C]

I've read through this and I have to say, straw-men arguments are ripe here. If anyone's interested, here's my take on it...

If you're a good MWO player and you've developed some physical handicap that doesn't let you be the same good MWO player, then either (A) You adapt to a new way of playing, which only you can figure out, OR ( You find some other medium of entertainment.

How long it takes for you to reach Destination (A) is irrelevant to any argument to make things easy. Likewise, you wanting some kind of incentive from the developers so that you'd continue playing despite losing interest in the game is irrelevant to any argument to make things easy.

This game suffers from the following:-
1. Lack of Buddy System to play together with friends at any point of time
2. Lack of a good match maker so that a vast number of games doesn't end in a 12-3 scoreline
3. The supposedly top game mode called "Faction Play", which is meant to depict the struggle of the Battletech universe, where you pick a career path, choose factions to fight for and gain good rewards, is a botched up nonsense that players almost never play.

I'm sure there are many other reasons but for me, those 3 are the main reasons that I don't find MWO fun anymore despite me craving to pilot big-stompy mechs and destroy other big, stompy mechs. So, here's the thing... if someone here who has the PGI's ear, would be so kind as to tell them to stop "tweaking" and "improving" what was not broken and instead work primarily on Faction Play concept so that new players would play regularly to get the hang of the game and then start to immerse themselves into the Battletech universe, THEN, we can worry about LRM trajectory and other minuscule things.

To have a "Here's a way to get started" mode called "Quick Play" as the primary mode of action, instead of the mid and end game content like Faction Play, in something that's more than half a decade old is sheer nonsense on the part of the development team. Figure that one out first before you start tweaking weapons and hardpoints. There.

[Scout Derek]

FRAGTAST1C, on 06 March 2019 - 11:02 PM, said:

I've read through this and I have to say, straw-men arguments are ripe here. If anyone's interested, here's my take on it...

If you're a good MWO player and you've developed some physical handicap that doesn't let you be the same good MWO player, then either (A) You adapt to a new way of playing, which only you can figure out, OR ( You find some other medium of entertainment.

How long it takes for you to reach Destination (A) is irrelevant to any argument to make things easy. Likewise, you wanting some kind of incentive from the developers so that you'd continue playing despite losing interest in the game is irrelevant to any argument to make things easy.

This game suffers from the following:-
1. Lack of Buddy System to play together with friends at any point of time
2. Lack of a good match maker so that a vast number of games doesn't end in a 12-3 scoreline
3. The supposedly top game mode called "Faction Play", which is meant to depict the struggle of the Battletech universe, where you pick a career path, choose factions to fight for and gain good rewards, is a botched up nonsense that players almost never play.

I'm sure there are many other reasons but for me, those 3 are the main reasons that I don't find MWO fun anymore despite me craving to pilot big-stompy mechs and destroy other big, stompy mechs. So, here's the thing... if someone here who has the PGI's ear, would be so kind as to tell them to stop "tweaking" and "improving" what was not broken and instead work primarily on Faction Play concept so that new players would play regularly to get the hang of the game and then start to immerse themselves into the Battletech universe, THEN, we can worry about LRM trajectory and other minuscule things.

To have a "Here's a way to get started" mode called "Quick Play" as the primary mode of action, instead of the mid and end game content like Faction Play, in something that's more than half a decade old is sheer nonsense on the part of the development team. Figure that one out first before you start tweaking weapons and hardpoints. There.

it's not about the LRM buff I'm concerned with, it's the ATM buff.

LRM buff is fine, but buffing an already Close Quarters combat weapon that spits out 36 damage per ATM12 launcher is ridiculous.

[The6thMessenger]

Prototelis, on 06 March 2019 - 09:37 PM, said:

No, it is not. If someone with clear severe disadvantages progresses to the point of not needing to use auto-aim it completely defeats the point of the "strong auto-aim for the disabled" argument.

The other guy insisted for the handicap, I was for the noobs in the first place. Likewise, there's plenty of other disabilities out there, such as people afflicted parkinsons disease. But again, this is irrelevant to me, I wasn't defending the disabilities, I was defending the noob use.

Prototelis, on 06 March 2019 - 09:37 PM, said:

And to say he can't hold a lock when you can watch him hold laser burns on chosen components is stupid.

First, I never said that he can't, I just said I would not expect it from him, there's a difference. Hopefully I don't have to break my dictionary out just so you could understand what "expect" means.

Second, CHLL burns at 1.55s duration, compare the 190 m/s velocity for LRMs, which would vary between 0.9473s to 4.7368s time to target. At 400 meters, that is 2.105s, which is waaay longer than a CHLL. And that is not including the lock-time. So yeah, no, I wouldn't put laser-burn and maintaining-lock at the same category. Maybe post PTS-implementation though.

But yeah, like I said:

The6thMessenger, on 06 March 2019 - 09:18 PM, said:

I guess its just easier to misrepresent someone than actually deal with his point.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 07 March 2019 - 01:41 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Scout Derek, on 06 March 2019 - 11:21 PM, said:

it's not about the LRM buff I'm concerned with, it's the ATM buff.

LRM buff is fine, but buffing an already Close Quarters combat weapon that spits out 36 damage per ATM12 launcher is ridiculous.

Well, if by principle, then no, I guess not.

But an arcing, homing weapon under 270m, 210m/s isn't exactly that far off 242m/s -- that is 1.285s vs 1.125s time-to-target, a 0.16s difference.

[Warning incoming Humble Dexterer]

Appogee, on 03 March 2019 - 05:25 PM, said:

It's clear from the Steam player data, the wait times in the queues, and the failed matchmaking, that gaining new players, and retaining players are the two biggest issues confronting MWO.

What is your view?

The biggest issue is by far new players going to FP early to unlock their first (free) mech bays, and them and their random team getting stomped in ~every matches by 12-player groups trying to beat their previous speed run record.

And the faster those casual players get hunted out of FP, the more hostile FP becomes for anyone else wanting to come.

Those players come looking for a (slow paced) Mechwarrior game, and instead land on a First Person twitch shooter in which their torso gets blown up by 2 pinpoint alpha strikes, and if they return to QP they don't get to unlock the mech bays that can only be unlocked in FP.

[Tesunie]

Humble Dexter, on 07 March 2019 - 07:13 AM, said:

Those players come looking for a (slow paced) Mechwarrior game, and instead land on a First Person twitch shooter in which their torso gets blown up by 2 pinpoint alpha strikes, and if they return to QP they don't get to unlock the mech bays that can only be unlocked in FP.

A lot of that is a problem between ability to carry high alphas, pin point damage (being able to determine where your damage goes rather easily), Weapon recycle/DPS rates (BT has damage typically being dealt in 10 second intervals, we could have DPS more closely match the weapons default damages within 10 seconds, rather than per hit), and heat capacity/thresholds (we have high heat caps).

Of course, recognizing the problems and having a workable solution are completely different things. For example, pin point use to be counteracted by delayed convergence. Visually, if damage applied when you hit, it was a really nice system and did help in spreading damage away from a single component (unless you really worked at it for a while). But back then we had Lag Shield. With HSR, delayed convergence can not work, as the system can't effectively predict where you are from lag, and what your convergence was at that time... We've had recommendations to add cone of fire, ghost heat (in game now and always being tweaked), mounting limits, Hard point size limits, firing limits (you can't fire more than X weapons within Y seconds), power draw systems, a "max damage per second a mech can be dealt, all other damage need not apply" invulnerability system, etc. Some of these suggestions are obviously not going to work, been tried in a PTS or haven't been tested (externally) yet... but it seems like we all want similar things, reduce the ability to take a single component out as easily as we can unless you know how to do so (so skill doesn't become irrelevant, but it somehow will require more skill/time/effort to do).

I do want to leave a comment that I do agree that FP needs some work. Some of it's problem I think have been the many map resets. That first map before it's reset saw a lot of interesting things happen. After the first reset is when I saw FP start to have population problems (and that was with combined faction buckets population problems). I think that was when we all felt that the FP map was meaningless.

[Mystere]

Charles Sennet, on 06 March 2019 - 07:22 PM, said:

It promotes cancerous gameplay

I see that as a mere opinion, not a fact.

[Tesunie]

Mystere, on 07 March 2019 - 01:44 PM, said:

I see that as a mere opinion, not a fact.

Do recall, most people seem to call anything they don't like to play or have affecting them as "cancerous". "I can't see you and shoot back at you, it's cancerous". "That weapon combo one shot KOed me, it's cancerous".

I mean, there are some things that are bad for balance and need to be adjusted, but an entire weapon set is rarely as 'cancerous' as people make it out to be. Now, what people do when using said weapon might be a different story. Poorly used LRMs seem to be a common problem (in my opinion), where as LRMs themselves don't seem to be an issue.

[Weeny Machine]

Tesunie, on 07 March 2019 - 01:49 PM, said:

Do recall, most people seem to call anything they don't like to play or have affecting them as "cancerous". "I can't see you and shoot back at you, it's cancerous". "That weapon combo one shot KOed me, it's cancerous".

I mean, there are some things that are bad for balance and need to be adjusted, but an entire weapon set is rarely as 'cancerous' as people make it out to be. Now, what people do when using said weapon might be a different story. Poorly used LRMs seem to be a common problem (in my opinion), where as LRMs themselves don't seem to be an issue.

It is not about like or disliking. Sometimes you need to take a step back and ask yourself if the weapon system is affecting gameplay in a negative way (and I do not speak of being op or not op):

Take lock on weapons and light mechs:
Agility and dodging has lost the race already and armour/structure and high dps/alphas are more important than being able to run 140+ km/h

However, streaks simply hard counter light mechs. A streak dog can one-shot you, a streak crow 2-shot most lights. Speed and agility get totally negated. It is unimportant if the weapon system isn't that great vs heavier mechs (actually since it became torso seeking it got better). Imagine someone waits 3-5 min to finally play. Then a eats a complete streak salvo and is crippled or even dead. Is that fun? Nope, certainly not even despite the game balance overall isn't affected simply because most people drop in heavies assaults. Nevertheless, streak boats are a catastrophe for lights and also borderline op for meds

In case of LRMs it is similar. I have just played a match where a Javelin was completely out of position. I engaged and was ripping it a new one, then suddenly 2 huge volley of lrms came and thanks to their high velocity I took most of it. For a light this kind of damae, even spread, is problematic.Of course, the Javeling was able to run off.

This kind of easy and fast support which is even quite punishing promotes static gameplay and is another factor negating speed etc.
Is it OP? Nope. Is it unhealthy for the gameplay. Certainly

Edited by Bush Hopper, 08 March 2019 - 04:17 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

Bush Hopper, on 08 March 2019 - 03:28 AM, said:

It is not about like or disliking. Sometimes you need to take a step back and ask yourself if the weapon system is affecting gameplay in a negative way (and I do not speak of being op or not op):

Take lock on weapons and light mechs:
Agility and dodging has lost the race already and armour/structure and high dps/alphas are more important than being able to run 140+ km/h

However, streaks simply hard counter light mechs. A streak dog can one-shot you, a streak crow 2-shot most lights. Speed and agility get totally negated. It is unimportant if the weapon system isn't that great vs heavier mechs (actually since it became torso seeking it got better). Imagine someone waits 3-5 min to finally play. Then a eats a complete streak salvo and is crippled or even dead. Is that fun?

In case of LRMs it is similar. I have just played a match where a Javelin was completely out of position. I engaged and was ripping it a new one, then suddenly 2 huge volley of lrms came and thanks to their high velocity I took most of it. For a light this kind of damae, even spread, is problematic.Of course, the Javeling was able to run off.

This kind of easy and fast support which is even quite punishing promotes static gameplay and is another factor negating speed etc.
Is it OP? Nope. Is it unhealthy for the gameplay. Certainly

Hmm. Well, Streaks are a hard-counter for fast lights, the hell did you expect. Simmilarly LRMs, it has a lot of counters with them. It wouldn't make any sense for a counter to not counter.

That being said, you are right, it's about the impact. Then again, I wonder what will happen on an online game with high expectations, with a lot of veterans just senselessly beating noobs over and over.

Don't get me wrong, I'm annoyed with the occasional lights, flea, or piranha, but I hold no malice to them. But this sounds like just what you would expect from a fast light, they are supposed to be squishy. Just as you wouldn't expect being hit by LRMs under hard cover, or couldn't properly lock when under the influence of ECM.

Honestly though, I'm more inclined of a homing-system rework.

[Mkoll666]

those lrm and atm buffs are just bad for the health of the game. Especially the increased and ark and velocity will be very annoying. ATMS needed nerfs and no buffs. direct fire for lrms is a good idea but indirect needs very strong nerfs its a terrible antifun playstyle and yes I run radar derp and use cover but because of terrible map design there are a ton of maps where u cant stay in cover.

my votes are hpg, robulite and crimson because there are parts of the map where u can avoid this unfun game mechanic.

espically considering that I play with 1 or 2 friends in group queue and get regularly get matched against 12man stacks that run cheesy strats like mass lrm boats all night is very annoying and lets us quit the game more often than not because its unfun than because we have to go to bed actually

I dont know how good the new AMS will be (since velocity changes and ams changes were added later on, I mean srsly? why do we have a PTS there PGI!) but the antimissle options are weak in general and it should not be that every mech that does not have ecm, multiple ams or a combination is not viable and that u always have to go full radar derp (if u always need to take it its not a skilltree choice anymore and becomes core gamemechanic)

[Tesunie]

Bush Hopper, on 08 March 2019 - 03:28 AM, said:

It is not about like or disliking. Sometimes you need to take a step back and ask yourself if the weapon system is affecting gameplay in a negative way (and I do not speak of being op or not op):

Take lock on weapons and light mechs:
Agility and dodging has lost the race already and armour/structure and high dps/alphas are more important than being able to run 140+ km/h

However, streaks simply hard counter light mechs. A streak dog can one-shot you, a streak crow 2-shot most lights. Speed and agility get totally negated. It is unimportant if the weapon system isn't that great vs heavier mechs (actually since it became torso seeking it got better). Imagine someone waits 3-5 min to finally play. Then a eats a complete streak salvo and is crippled or even dead. Is that fun? Nope, certainly not even despite the game balance overall isn't affected simply because most people drop in heavies assaults. Nevertheless, streak boats are a catastrophe for lights and also borderline op for meds

In case of LRMs it is similar. I have just played a match where a Javelin was completely out of position. I engaged and was ripping it a new one, then suddenly 2 huge volley of lrms came and thanks to their high velocity I took most of it. For a light this kind of damae, even spread, is problematic.Of course, the Javeling was able to run off.

This kind of easy and fast support which is even quite punishing promotes static gameplay and is another factor negating speed etc.
Is it OP? Nope. Is it unhealthy for the gameplay. Certainly

I would mention that my response there was directed at "how does your points support handicap people needing "aim assist" weapons", which is why I listed the aspects of LRMs I like and enjoy. If you notice, "aim assist to help handicap people" isn't on the list, which was more so my point. LRMs, if they are to retain indirect fire which I do think is important to keep for the weapon system, needs some form of homing.

How about waiting 3-5 minutes to get a game, get a single shot to your 100 ton mech, and die from ammo explosion. Just had a match where that happened. One hit, and my 100 ton assault mech was down... On notation of SSRMs, I will point out their spread, need for a lock on (Lights, tag team them with two ECM systems, that shuts them right down), lock on time (if you have ECM and you see it's disabled... might want to consider an evac) and/or keep your distance from those mechs once identified and let other elements of your team handle them. My own light mechs tend to use mid ranged weapons, such as my twin LL and dual ERML Raven. I keep those threats outside their ranges.

I might also mention, in relation to LRMs, that missile weapons have many counters already in the game. They are the only weapon to have any counters placed in. There are:
- AMS: This thing shoots down any missile, be it SRMs, MRMs, SSRMs, ATMs or even LRMs. They are most effective on longer ranged missiles, such as LRMs and ATMs and a bit for MRMs, than they are for shorter ranged engagements simply due to time able to take their effects on their counters. A single AMS can shoot down upwards of 20+ LRM/ATM missiles with perfect positioning. With good positioning, it can take down 15 without much difficulty, but average 5-8 missiles for the most part. Now, that's a single AMS unit on a single mech... Imagine what might happen on those dual, triple or the quad AMS mechs? 40+ missiles with perfect position, average pf 10-16 missiles with you being the target, with just two AMS on only youself. Get a few teammates, or even a whole team, with AMS and suddenly you just don't care about LRMs/ATMs anymore. With enough, MRMs, SRMs and even SSRMs become rendered near useless. (However, most people who claim the toxicity of LRMs neglect AMS from my experience.)
- LAMS: Same as above, but not limited to ammo counts, nor ammo explosion chances. Produces heat as it's trade off, and normally can't be taken on hot running mechs or in massed amounts. Best paired off with normal AMS for a "best of both worlds".
- ECM: Get close enough and it disables a homing missile user's ability to get locks. (Countered by AP or another ECM unit. Travel in packs!) At a range, it permits you to get close before a lock can be obtained as well as makes getting a missile lock harder to do. A team full of these is very difficult to deal with for homing missiles, and can effectively, it send in on a target in packs, make it impossible for missile locks to even be acquired once things get rolling.
- Stealth Armor: Needs ECM, sure. Once you engage Stealth though, all missile locks are instantly dropped. Hear the warning, turn on your stealth and laugh. I've also noticed that, even if I managed to disable the ECM with an AP, it appears as though Stealth Armor continues to be engaged... Maybe it's changed since I last saw that effect, but I've had times where I couldn't disable their Stealth, despite doing tactics that disabled ECM (PPC hit, AP, ECM in counter mode, etc).
- Size. Yes, the very size of your mech and it's hit boxes have an impact on LRMs and ATMs. The smaller the mech, the less missiles that will hit, due to how spread works. The larger the target, the more missiles will land. LRMs are actually most effective against Assaults such as the King Crab, than light mechs, such as the Locust, Flea or Commando. This is actually true for any homing missile (except SSRMs).
- Shape: Not really a counter, but... The shape of the mech also helps determine where homing missile damage is placed. That spread means a mech with a wide CT hitbox will take more damage there, or a mech with high shoulder guards that twists very well will take more damage to the arm.
- Speed: Speed can counter LRMs/ATMs fairly well. Just running perpendicular to the launcher/flight path of the missiles will shed some of the damage into the ground. Being fast also means more likely chance to seek cover. Speed is a minor counter to SSRMs, as if you can duck in and out of cover (with Radar Deprivation, if not ECM as well) to prevent locks completely. Also, if you can spin around a target well enough, some mechs can't track very well, meaning that they can't get a missile lock from failure to keep themselves on target long enough to do so.
- Radar Deprivation: It's a pain to locking weapons. If you really don't like lock on weapons, take maxed Radar Dep.

I will state now that missile locking is one of the most complex systems in the game. I've only glossed over the counters to missile locks. Obviously there are other things, such as UAVs, TAG, NARC, etc to consider... but your most powerful ally against missiles of all kinds is AMS. Sadly, most people don't even bother with it...

---

On the topic of game play with certain weapons, indirect fired LRMs are and should remain a thing. However, I can't control how people use weapons in the game, as many people use LRMs very poorly, especially those who fire only indirectly. The proposed changes to missiles from what I understood was to make direct fired LRMs more powerful than indirect fired, which should support most people's opinion of LRMs. This makes the "cancerous" style game play of "hide out back, leach locks" indirect fire only less effective.

People complain more about LRMs indirect abilities and when players utilize exclusively that (which I agree with many posters that using only indirect LRMs and never showing your mech's face is often bad for the team and tends to lead to a loss compared to armor share, etc). They don't mind those LRM users who are with their team, taking hits and popping in and out of cover, working as much to get their own locks as much as the team helps to provide locks.


As for SSRMs... I don't have much to say on those. I don't tend to use them, find that (unless extreme boated) they can't hurt anything (once did a Black Lanner with two SSRM6s, and had light mechs laugh as they shreeded me alive), spread their damage and weight more than they normally are worth. If I take a short ranged missile option, I go more for SRMs or even MRMs if I have the tonnage to invest. Between being able to aim the damage, not having to wait for a lock and less auto-spread, I find I have better average performance over SSRMs. However, SSRMs are suppose to be (in this game) the anti-light solution. They suffer against other weight class targets.

[Dee Eight]

So I'm not going to quote any particular poster above that mentioned "new players" and "retaining players" as problems.. but the increasing number of twitch streamers trying the game same to contradict your arguments. Take Ashlyn Black for example, in so far only about 60 hours of game time she's gone from Tier 5 to Tier 3, been made a member of Dropship 4, scored her first Ace of Spades on stream last night, and is already pulling consistently about 50-80 viewers when she's on MWO. She's also had two viewers gift her mech packs (one a full madcat2 pack, another a basic marauder IIC pack) plus she's early-adopter bought into MW5 at the base level I believe. She's been streaming for I think five months now total and came to the game because she saw an announcement about MW5. I've already seen others in her stream ask about the game (what it is, how do they get to play it, etc). What needs to be done to draw in more players is to have more streamers who do MORE than just MWO, pulling viewers of the other games they play to their MWO streams. Oh and she's putting up result #s that people who have been here for YEARS still cannot manage. Oh and she's largely doing it only with dakka-builds. I think i've seen her drop a missile or energy focus build into live servers maybe ten times total.

This is the current month...
414 Ashlyn Black 81 38 2.13 125 80 1.56 120 313

This is last month
9119 Ashlyn Black 47 48 0.98 80 61 1.31 95
256

Edited by Dee Eight, 08 March 2019 - 09:55 AM.

[Tesunie]

Mkoll666, on 08 March 2019 - 08:38 AM, said:

those lrm and atm buffs are just bad for the health of the game. Especially the increased and ark and velocity will be very annoying. ATMS needed nerfs and no buffs. direct fire for lrms is a good idea but indirect needs very strong nerfs its a terrible antifun playstyle and yes I run radar derp and use cover but because of terrible map design there are a ton of maps where u cant stay in cover.

my votes are hpg, robulite and crimson because there are parts of the map where u can avoid this unfun game mechanic.

espically considering that I play with 1 or 2 friends in group queue and get regularly get matched against 12man stacks that run cheesy strats like mass lrm boats all night is very annoying and lets us quit the game more often than not because its unfun than because we have to go to bed actually

I dont know how good the new AMS will be (since velocity changes and ams changes were added later on, I mean srsly? why do we have a PTS there PGI!) but the antimissle options are weak in general and it should not be that every mech that does not have ecm, multiple ams or a combination is not viable and that u always have to go full radar derp (if u always need to take it its not a skilltree choice anymore and becomes core gamemechanic)

Remember, what you call unfun, some of us enjoy. Or are you complaining because "they are shooting me and I can't shoot them back"?

You underestimate the LRM counters. AMS is far better than you seem to think, with proper positioning. If you are alone, well, it's rarely a good idea to be alone. Radar Dep does more than Adv. Decay, for the record. If you are also running in group play, then you should be able to get more people to have AMS. Plan to stick together. If you have a reasonable amount of AMS, than missile effectively really goes down. Remember, it's typically a 1.5 ton investment. If everyone took one and stuck together... with an average of 8 missiles shot down per, I'll say 10 mechs took it that are standing together... That would be upwards of an average of 80 missiles going away. If you can get some faster screening AMS mechs in front of the rest, even more missiles are going down. A single dual AMS mech, say a Panther, Wolfhound or even a Kitfox, screening in front of your main body utilizing cover to not become LRM targets themselves could take down upwards of 40+ missiles on their own.

Recall, AMS has a spherical influence. If you can have missiles cross the largest portion of the sphere (dead missile), it's going to have massive effects. If you are only counting it on yourself against missiles heading at you, the radius of the sphere, it's going to have about half the effect it could have. AMS is better at protecting teammates than it is yourself.

Honestly, the best tactic against LRMs is AMS and keeping cover nearby. AMS is, if looked at for maximum effect, best on light mechs that can run "interference" on the incoming missiles, and can position themselves just in front of their team. Two or three dual/triple AMS light mechs can, if done well, provide all the AMS a team could need. However, most people don't seem to want to commit their tonnage to AMS, and instead want "moar" items for themselves. They see AMS as weak, but only because they haven't seen them used as part of a team. Too many people see themselves, and not the team.

As an LRM user (though not a boat), I've had many matches where a well placed AMS unit wreck my missiles as soon as they were leaving their tubes. I could do nothing while the AMS was nearby. Thankfully I bring plenty of direct fire weapons for those situations.

[Tesunie]

Dee Eight, on 08 March 2019 - 09:53 AM, said:

This is the current month...
414 Ashlyn Black 81 38 2.13 125 80 1.56 120 313

This is last month
9119 Ashlyn Black 47 48 0.98 80 61 1.31 95
256

As I always like to consider stats... I just want to say you might need to reconfigure these numbers. Right now, they are meaningless numbers with no labels and extremely hard to understand/read...

From what I can gather, they look like solid numbers to me.

[thievingmagpi]

Mystere, on 07 March 2019 - 01:44 PM, said:

I see that as a mere opinion, not a fact.

you'd better adjust your glasses then.

[thievingmagpi]

Dee Eight, on 08 March 2019 - 09:53 AM, said:

So I'm not going to quote any particular poster above that mentioned "new players" and "retaining players" as problems.. but the increasing number of twitch streamers trying the game same to contradict your arguments. Take Ashlyn Black for example, in so far only about 60 hours of game time she's gone from Tier 5 to Tier 3, been made a member of Dropship 4, scored her first Ace of Spades on stream last night, and is already pulling consistently about 50-80 viewers when she's on MWO. She's also had two viewers gift her mech packs (one a full madcat2 pack, another a basic marauder IIC pack) plus she's early-adopter bought into MW5 at the base level I believe. She's been streaming for I think five months now total and came to the game because she saw an announcement about MW5. I've already seen others in her stream ask about the game (what it is, how do they get to play it, etc). What needs to be done to draw in more players is to have more streamers who do MORE than just MWO, pulling viewers of the other games they play to their MWO streams. Oh and she's putting up result #s that people who have been here for YEARS still cannot manage. Oh and she's largely doing it only with dakka-builds. I think i've seen her drop a missile or energy focus build into live servers maybe ten times total.

This is the current month...
414 Ashlyn Black 81 38 2.13 125 80 1.56 120 313

This is last month
9119 Ashlyn Black 47 48 0.98 80 61 1.31 95
256

Most "new players" aren't accessing mwo via twitch-based revenue.

Some might have an interested in doing so, but PGI couldn't even wrangle up a few dollars to send *official world championship stream casters* a green screen.

You'll also notice a pretty sharp decline in mwo-stream population. There was one point where multiple streamers were pulling upwards of 100 viewers. Sometimes you'd have nights with B33f, Bear claw and Maj all streaming. There was even a point where pgi was sponsoring *weekly* 1v1 streams (masters challenge). Lol.

The most popular MWO streamer these days is a guy who come from another game (Beags and Jam, he doesn't even stream mwo much anymore) and he managed to have more viewers watching him play MWO than any top mwo streamer, official mwo tournament stream included. Who the hell is Beagsandjam by the way.... Quality advertising by PGI community management.

You're going to have to find a better metric to measure "player retention" than Hot Girl on Twitch.

Tesunie, on 08 March 2019 - 09:53 AM, said:

Remember, what you call unfun, some of us enjoy. Or are you complaining because "they are shooting me and I can't shoot them back"?

You underestimate the LRM counters. AMS is far better than you seem to think, with proper positioning. If you are alone, well, it's rarely a good idea to be alone. Radar Dep does more than Adv. Decay, for the record. If you are also running in group play, then you should be able to get more people to have AMS. Plan to stick together. If you have a reasonable amount of AMS, than missile effectively really goes down. Remember, it's typically a 1.5 ton investment. If everyone took one and stuck together... with an average of 8 missiles shot down per, I'll say 10 mechs took it that are standing together... That would be upwards of an average of 80 missiles going away. If you can get some faster screening AMS mechs in front of the rest, even more missiles are going down. A single dual AMS mech, say a Panther, Wolfhound or even a Kitfox, screening in front of your main body utilizing cover to not become LRM targets themselves could take down upwards of 40+ missiles on their own.

Recall, AMS has a spherical influence. If you can have missiles cross the largest portion of the sphere (dead missile), it's going to have massive effects. If you are only counting it on yourself against missiles heading at you, the radius of the sphere, it's going to have about half the effect it could have. AMS is better at protecting teammates than it is yourself.

Honestly, the best tactic against LRMs is AMS and keeping cover nearby. AMS is, if looked at for maximum effect, best on light mechs that can run "interference" on the incoming missiles, and can position themselves just in front of their team. Two or three dual/triple AMS light mechs can, if done well, provide all the AMS a team could need. However, most people don't seem to want to commit their tonnage to AMS, and instead want "moar" items for themselves. They see AMS as weak, but only because they haven't seen them used as part of a team. Too many people see themselves, and not the team.

As an LRM user (though not a boat), I've had many matches where a well placed AMS unit wreck my missiles as soon as they were leaving their tubes. I could do nothing while the AMS was nearby. Thankfully I bring plenty of direct fire weapons for those situations.

This guy better tell EMP the secret to defeating LRMs. They'll be kicking themselves when they find out the answer was just so simple!

[Tesunie]

thievingmagpi, on 08 March 2019 - 09:59 AM, said:

you'd better adjust your glasses then.

Most of this thread has been about opinion (LRMs bad for game play), vs actual facts being displayed. In some respect, opinion is fine, as opinions are drawn from our individual experiences.

I mean, my opinion of H.Gauss (for use and being shot with) is that it's bad for me to use (I don't do so well with charge weapons it seems) but at the same time dual H. Gauss with it's 50 pin point damage feels a tad too strong to me. Someone else will come along and tell me their "opinion" that H. Gauss is just fine. The charge mechanic makes it so it requires more skill to use, so that skill should rightly be rewarded with 50 PPFLD when used correctly, and that nothing is wrong with high alpha values.

The beauty of opinion is, we are all entitled to our own. The problem is when opinion gets tossed out as fact. For example:

Opinion: I get poor performance from AMS, so I don't take it because I think it's junk.

Opinion: AMS is really strong. They keep shooting down my missiles before they even get to leave the tubes, blinding myself with my own missile explosions.

Fact: AMS can take down upwards of 15+ missiles with reasonable positioning, per AMS. 5-8 missiles when those missiles are directed at you.

Neither stated opinion overrides the fact of what AMS actually does. However, each opinion is based off someone's person experiences. As we each have different experiences, we each will form different opinions. It does not make those opinions right nor wrong.

[Tesunie]

thievingmagpi, on 08 March 2019 - 10:10 AM, said:

This guy better tell EMP the secret to defeating LRMs. They'll be kicking themselves when they find out the answer was just so simple!

EMP already knows how to deal with LRMs. Positioning, cover, ECM, AMS getting into their minimum range, poke and scoot, Radar Deprivation... There are more than a single way to deal with LRMs.

I'm saying the best use of AMS (I worded that poorly in the post you quoted) is to have it positioned in front of your team so that missiles cross as much of the AMS sphere of influence as possible. AMS is not so great at protecting yourself from missiles coming in at you specifically. That was more so what I was trying to relay.