120 replies to this topic

[Novakaine]

My KDR would shoot straight up if I learned to stay off the front line

[Prototelis]

I dunno man, most of the time I see you in game you're p.isolated and making yourself easy pickins.

[Tesunie]

Prototelis, on 27 June 2019 - 12:44 PM, said:

That sounds like a bunch of hyperbole to me.

I bar is more like; "Don't say stupid **** about the game."

I'm not saying you would do that, but I've been in plenty of LRM discussions that boiled down to that. It's not a lie, and not hyperbole (so that's how that's spelled). Many 17+ page threads happened because of exactly such a thing happening.

I don't see why LRMs need to be such a heated subject. I find that many weapons are far more balanced now than they use to be. Hardest weapons for myself to leverage are weapons with shooting delays, such as Gauss and RACs. I find LRMs as of the current iteration is reasonably fine. Then again, I found plenty of uses of LRMs since I first started to play, but I've never/very rarely boat LRMs which may be why I see them differently.

Only time I can specifically recall LRMs being "horrible" was back when ECM was first introduced and was vastly OP to the point of ECM mechs being king mechs of the game (Raven and Commando). Only things back then that could hurt those mechs (with a lack of lag compensation in the game and fast mechs having "Lag shields" in mind) was another ECM SSRM mech (where SSRMs also typically dealt 5 damage/missile due to how splash damage was handled). Packs of Raven's where feared back then, and LRMs where nearly useless if even a single ECM was in effect. (Back then, only thing to counter ECM was another ECM.)


Right now, I feel that most weapons are useful, within their given role. Some need crazy boating/number of hardpoints to really be scary effective (MGs), where as others require specific situations to really be effective (Flamers). Some weapons are just good at getting damage down range (SSRMs for example), and others are better at specifically taking components, or with enough well aimed shots drop targets (PPC, Gauss).

Worst weapon in the game at the moment are probable Micro weapons, unless you can get a crazy amount of them on your mech. Otherwise, they are good at supplementing close range combat and probably not useful in small numbers... Second worse is probably SSRMs due to weight and spread, but they do have their uses.

AKA: I feel most every weapon is good currently in the game, and they have their uses. Depends upon the situation and how they are intended to be used.

[Prototelis]

LRMs are specifically a heated subject because forum proponents brag about how they get higher numbers by exclusively sandbagging their team with a low skill minimal risk weapon.

[Kodan Black]

Anomalocaris, on 27 June 2019 - 11:06 AM, said:

How do you guys keep missing the point? He's talking about an auto lock on a mech he's stalking for a backshot (for example) causing LRM boats 1000m away to start firing at the target and spook it, making his attempt at a sneaky backstab that much harder (or impossible).

People should absolutely play the game how it makes them happy, no sense playing it otherwise. But if you have ever played LRM at 1000m out, this is false. How long are you stalking the mech and prepping for a backshot? Because at that distance it will take several seconds to actually get lock, ASSUMING you are sitting there facing that direction when it pops up. If not, add time to notice, rotate, etc. If you just don't like LRM players and want to actively disadvantage your team to make a point, that is entirely your choice. But this notion I've seen of people acting like "hey if I make my teammates have a harder time they will learn and adapt" just isn't reality. They'll simply be LRM mechs not firing away from the team instead of LRM mechs firing away from the team. QP is randoms thrown together, it is a team game but a team of random players. If this was a group drop scenario where you could teach other players it would be a good approach.

[Nightbird]

I'm amused, all I said in the OP is that if you don't want your target to be LRMed (plenty of valid scenarios you'd want this), then you should disable auto-lock.

Funny all the LRM proponents jumped in.

As if they are entitled to free locks.

[Tesunie]

Kodan Black, on 27 June 2019 - 01:04 PM, said:

People should absolutely play the game how it makes them happy, ...

Of course, with the *.

* So long as "how it makes them happy" is within the defined rules of the game.


I say this because, for some crazy people, killing teammates and dealing intentional team damage is "fun" to them and "make them happy"... but is against the rules defined by the game.

Yes. I'm trying to be a little funny with my technicality...

[Kodan Black]

I'm a proponent of every weapon in the game since that is what they are there for. Except RACs, I hate those. They should be removed.

[Tesunie]

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 01:09 PM, said:

I'm amused, all I said in the OP is that if you don't want your target to be LRMed (plenty of valid scenarios you'd want this), then you should disable auto-lock.

Funny all the LRM proponents jumped in.

As if they are entitled to free locks.

First, title.

Second:

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 08:15 AM, said:

Just added this line to your user.cfg file:

gp_mech_disable_autotarget = 1

thievingmagpi, on 27 June 2019 - 08:58 AM, said:

also makes it so no one can steal your kills I like it

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 08:59 AM, said:

someone gets it :thumb:

prevents useless LRMs from giving away that you have a target lined up, and perhaps even stealing your kill

First few replies to the thread kinda dictated how this conversation would most likely go. It makes it appear, no matter what your first post may have been (which isn't unreasonable especially in an ambush situation), that you don't like LRMs, don't like people who use them, and want to hinder the future use of LRMs because you don't like them... AKA: This makes it seem like you wish to grief LRM users simply because you don't like them, not because there are situations where you may not want LRMs heading to a target to preserve the element of stealth.

In essence, the first part of this thread made it appear like you don't want to share "any" locks with allies whom have LRMs simply because you don't want them to "take your precious kills", rather than "these specific situations, having LRMs notify a target I'm near them is a bad thing for the team".

So, the final question falls down to: Are you wishing to help your team, your entire team, or are you wishing to help only the parts of your team you deem worthy, even if it could cost your team the match? Do you hate LRMs so much that you (appear) to have to go out of your way to "punish them" within the written rules of the game (rather than the intent)?


As mentioned above, appearances say a lot here. You say one thing, appear to be saying another thing later, and then are amazed when people take what you say in one section and comment on it. If you don't like LRMs, then you don't need to use them. There is no reason to punish teammates who have decided to use them, especially if it's tactically adventitious for your team to assist them? (We are not talking rare moments, such as your ambush situation, where notifying the enemy that someone is nearby via incoming LRMs would be bad for the team tactically. We seem to be talking about all LRMs and locks for them in general ("free locks"), with the surface tactical presentation of "in an ambush" as the example case...)

I would present the statement/question: Would you normally acquire a lock in that situation if you had not known your team had LRMs? Are you specifically playing differently because your team has LRMs, and are you doing so specifically to hinder their use only because you can?

Your ambush situation is an excellent example for a moment when you would not want to have LRMs incoming on your lock (yet), until you've sprung your ambush. In a more common "combat line" situation, where you normally would not withhold locks. It should only be an asset if LRMs are incoming onto your target, placing more damage onto an enemy target. (Rather it's a "free lock" from you, a "leach to the team" or whatever personal view you may have about it.)

In most situations, if you are intentionally withholding locks just because you know your team has LRMs and only to hinder them, that is a (nonpunishable) form of griefing. It's also not helpful to your team as a whole either.


So, basically, the question falls onto why you wish to not get a lock. It's not so much a question about autolocking (which I'm not in disagreement about in the ambush situation presented).

[Brown_Sea_Kraken]

Most of the replies to OP are plain hilarious. My faith in the community is at its lowest point xd

[Teenage Mutant Ninja Urbie]

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 10:18 AM, said:

I didn't say I wasn't bashing

I didnt wanna like that.. but now I have to

Red_October, on 27 June 2019 - 01:43 PM, said:

Most of the replies to OP are plain hilarious. My faith in the community is at its lowest point xd

just wait for it.. whenever you think "can't get worse than this" - the mwo-nascar/lurm-elite surprises you

[Vincent DIFrancesco]

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 01:09 PM, said:

As if they are entitled to free locks.

"Free" locks. lol

Seriously, dude, if you want to be "that guy" who doesn't lock targets just to be an a** to your team, by all means. But stop acting like people using your locks are somehow mooching off you or stealing your stuff. No kill belongs to you until you actually get the killing blow. Just enjoy your KMDD bonus and the fact that you have teammates supporting you.

[The6thMessenger]

...

That's some hateboner there.

[LordNothing]

i dont really like autolock. but i dont really give it time to do anything as my r pressing reflex has been so well homed that i find myself spamming it in other games.

besides if you are worried about kill stealing, you can put the incoming lerms to your advantage. let them strip armor while you alpha core. id be more worried about the lermer hitting you instead, which is easily solved by repositioning.

the targeting data alone is worth its weight in gold. whats squishy? is there a nasty weapon i need to take out? should i even be fighting this mech? plenty of selfish reasons to press r before you even need to consider teamplay reasons.

if it were me id rather this game not have free c3 everywhere and have passive radar mode.

Edited by LordNothing, 27 June 2019 - 04:10 PM.

[Kroete]

The6thMessenger, on 27 June 2019 - 03:28 PM, said:

...

That's some hateboner there.

Thats the internet,
but the fun thing is, noone cares,
the players will still take what they want and do what they want
and the most dont even read the forum.

About killstealing:
Kills are not worth much if we dont see solokills and kmdd in the stats.
With a big lrm boat you get around 3 kmmd for every kill,
if you are smallminded you could claim that 3 kills where stolen from your stats for every kill thats shown.
For a mg boat, it works the other way around ...

Edited by Kroete, 27 June 2019 - 04:20 PM.

[Nightbird]

Vincent DIFrancesco, on 27 June 2019 - 03:28 PM, said:

"Free" locks. lol

Seriously, dude, if you want to be "that guy" who doesn't lock targets just to be an a** to your team, by all means. But stop acting like people using your locks are somehow mooching off you or stealing your stuff. No kill belongs to you until you actually get the killing blow. Just enjoy your KMDD bonus and the fact that you have teammates supporting you.

Someone who yells 'hold locks!' spotted

[Nightbird]

Tesunie, on 27 June 2019 - 10:49 AM, said:

What I read:
"Say no to teamwork."
"It's kill stealing, don't take my kills."
"It's all about me, forget the team."
"Look at my K/D rate people."

What this game should be about:
"Thanks for securing that kill. One less enemy to worry about to shoot back at the team."
"Hey, guys. So you know, there's an enemy over here."
"Nice job team, we did well. Yes, even you with less than 100 damage to your name. You may have not done well, but your actions held off the enemy flankers enough for the team to deal with the threat in front of us and then turn around to face them."
"Great job pulling their backs to face us. You may have sacrificed your own performance for the action, but we managed to drop that assault mech from the back from that. Good distraction."

Maybe it's not how you intended to sound, but that's what I kinda read from this. "Get your filthy LRMs out of my game."

If you read it as, 'LRM from the front or don't LRM at all', it'd be closer to the truth

[Tesunie]

Nightbird, on 27 June 2019 - 04:58 PM, said:

If you read it as, 'LRM from the front or don't LRM at all', it'd be closer to the truth

So, I should have no problems with your statements then. Got it.

As I've said before, I'm talking about how your posts appear. Maybe not how you intend for them to look.

[Nightbird]

Tesunie, on 27 June 2019 - 05:08 PM, said:

So, I should have no problems with your statements then. Got it.

As I've said before, I'm talking about how your posts appear. Maybe not how you intend for them to look.

Nope nope, you're welcome to have problems with my post. It's a free country.

[JediPanther]

Teenage Mutant Ninja Urbie, on 27 June 2019 - 02:17 PM, said:

I didnt wanna like that.. but now I have to



just wait for it.. whenever you think "can't get worse than this" - the mwo-nascar/lurm-elite surprises you

Aww someone wanted me to bring out a lrm 5 locust 3s? because that build and mech is very OP. So much kill steals if what you want to kill is ams ammo or heat build up from lams. It does make for a nice "scout-they-are-there" when you blind fire it to see a wall of ams fire suddenly go off. Hmm lots ams over that way...i wonder are there enemy mechs there?

A lrm 5 with half ton of ammo is great for just this reason. Not a good use of tonnage but still its a way to make the game a bit more fun.