305 replies to this topic

[FRAGTAST1C]

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 12:49 AM, said:

And again, that's just an even worse form of lasers. At least LRMs could go over obstacles, ATMs deal a fuckton damage, the SSRMs, well, the fire-and-forget that makes them relevant is now gone. The point of the comparison with lasers is the stare-time, and you will be forced to do so when you have to retain locks, and now hilariously with tag.

Here's a thought, maybe the problem itself is the need to distinguish from good players to bad players?


And again, it's just another worse lasers. You could highlight all the difference you like, but if you're staring towards the target with barely any gimmick like IDF or fuckton damage, it's basically just another laser. And what you have is a worse one at that.



I see, so that's what you want to do. Instead of making the entire missile system function like HL2 Rocket Launcher, you just do it with Streaks.

To be fair, the preemptive fire and then guide is really slipped my mind. But honestly, i could still see a terrible problem here -- that the SSRMs are Short Ranged still. 360m to 270m, really? You know HL2 Rocket launcher has vast open spaces to steer the rocket with immense targets like the Gunship and Strider, the SSRMs would explode within 1.38s to 0.96s and you have to hit small targets. Halve the velocity to double the duration, even double the health, you still have a reasonably long stare-time for a short duration.

Suppose that you could preemptively shoot, that's still an awfully small window of time to steer the missile volley towards your target.

I assure you, if it was LRMs or ATMs, i would honestly be on-board with those being guided versus homed. But not Streaks, it's too short and you are literally better off with pulse-lasers for the frantic action.



Guess what else is splashed, Streaks. Likewise what else you could fire en-masse, and guess what weapon hits immediately -- that's right, lazors. Which means you could leg someone quickly with a couple shots, no-if-ands-or-butts so long as you land -- and you will land because it's hit-scan.



And I'm telling you that's a bad idea. Not only that it's harder to do so with streaks, the LRMs and ATMs are actually doing well. If it were just a feature of TAG, I'd support it, not as a complete rework of the locking system.

The point of homing weapons is ease of use, that's why they are homing. This need to make them much like aimed weapons is just self-defeating, you might as well just leave them alone.

But the Streaks are fired from close range, right? The closer, the better it is for Streaks, right? And with the Tag, you now can fire without the need to lock-on. With this Tag guidance, you can fire Streaks in a brawling situation as well right from the get-go and not need to wait till you have a lock.

I don't know why we need to bring in the Good players or Bad. Here's my take on it... if you're changing something, make sure it's neutral to both sides. Let's not repeat the LRM mistakes again with Streaks.

Staring at the target is only when you fire from the exact optimal range. I don't honestly know which assault mech would boat Streaks instead of just SRMs with Artemis and brawl. With the Tag guidance, the same Assault mech can boat Streaks and brawl when needed while saying, "Shoooo!!" to the lights.

I just want the entire Lock-on weapon systems to be Tag-guided. LRMs, ATMs and Streaks. The "Steering" part is where the difficulty and practice bit comes into play. Imagine this... if you're in a brawl and need to twist away from incoming fire, you lose the lock. You'd need to lock onto the target again and then and only then, would you be able to fire the Streaks. With the Tag guidance system, you simply use Streaks like SRMs but with an added bonus of being in control of their flight path. You simply aim at the mech and fire. If you're proficient, you'll make full use of the Tag to steer the missiles in this short window.

Similar to the Pulse lasers sweeping the legs of the light mechs, with Tag guidances added to Streaks, you can just aim at the legs and fire. You do not need to worry about locks. Streaks will behave like SRMs but now, you have a slightly better flight path 'cause of the Tag.

The guided missile system is what I'm proposing, though, not lock-on Fire-and-Forget only to have to re-lock a target and then fire.

[The6thMessenger]

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 01:24 AM, said:

Chill dude. Its nothing personal. You base your arguments on an entirely wrong statement about 2s lock on time for Streaks on a non-ECM light. I'm just pointing it out to put things in perspective, coz if thats how long you think it takes now, I'm just wondering how long you estimate it'll take under your proposal of increased lock-on time for stacked streak launchers ... 10s? 20s?

You do realize I was pointing out base, as in before modifications. Obviously it's shorter with LOS, obviously it's longer with distance and/or ECM. You might as well point out wrong spellings in my sentences with that kind of nitpicking.

Like i've been telling people before, that's just the concept, it's not exact number. You want to lock 3 SSRM6s under 1s? Sure, but it will obviously lock 6 SSRM6s under 2s. Do i really need to explain what is e.g. (it's exempli gratia, or "example). Do I need to explain in detail what is an "example"?

I swear, its like you people deliberately misunderstand the concept.



Tell you what, I may have miscounted. It's just 1 seconds of lock-time without modifications, as in no LOS bonus or long-range lock penalty or ecm. Supposed that 2s to launch all 6 SSRM6s, and by 2s it's base. Would that be an improvement?

dario03, on 12 July 2019 - 01:25 AM, said:

By making the aiming skill matter???
If a player can't hit the light well with their heavy mech then they will lose. Just like how if the player spreads damage all over the place they will lose to a player who is also in a heavy mech but aiming better.

I see. So this is basically just the personal validation, and distinction from the low-skill? So how would it work on high-skill? Won't you agree that it wouldn't matter because whether it's SSRMs or HGRs, you'd nuke the light all the same because you'd be landing either volleys?

It's funny how when people can't aim, it's "git-gud", but when lights can't dodge missiles it's "why SSRMs counter Lights?". It's versus crutch of speed versus crutch of auto-aim. It's hilarious when if it's direct-fire, we balance by people that use it best. But when it's auto-aim, we have to balance it by potato.

dario03, on 12 July 2019 - 01:25 AM, said:

Can I get a weapon that automatically headshots assault mechs?

Only if I get a 200-ton urbie, and nobody else.

dario03, on 12 July 2019 - 01:25 AM, said:

Why should the game have a weapon counter the lower performing less used class for players lacking aim, if lacking aim also makes them lose to all classes?

Because it's the goddamn point? it's the niche, it's the deterrent, it achieves a role.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 12 July 2019 - 02:00 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

FRAGTAST1C, on 12 July 2019 - 01:34 AM, said:

But the Streaks are fired from close range, right? The closer, the better it is for Streaks, right? And with the Tag, you now can fire without the need to lock-on. With this Tag guidance, you can fire Streaks in a brawling situation as well right from the get-go and not need to wait till you have a lock.

So it's pseudo SRMs now? Could your idea even do my taxes?

Likewise wouldn't it makes sense that the SSRMs are supposedly for outranging SRMs in the first place? I mean it works well for the CSSRMs over CSRMs.

FRAGTAST1C, on 12 July 2019 - 01:34 AM, said:

I don't know why we need to bring in the Good players or Bad. Here's my take on it... if you're changing something, make sure it's neutral to both sides. Let's not repeat the LRM mistakes again with Streaks.

I'm well aware. The problem is that there are people who still want to involve more aiming in homing weapons, which is just self-defeating.

FRAGTAST1C, on 12 July 2019 - 01:34 AM, said:

Staring at the target is only when you fire from the exact optimal range. I don't honestly know which assault mech would boat Streaks instead of just SRMs with Artemis and brawl. With the Tag guidance, the same Assault mech can boat Streaks and brawl when needed while saying, "Shoooo!!" to the lights.

So basically you only start the timer when you're staring at the target?

Right so it's an even worse ATM now?

FRAGTAST1C, on 12 July 2019 - 01:34 AM, said:

I just want the entire Lock-on weapon systems to be Tag-guided. LRMs, ATMs and Streaks. The "Steering" part is where the difficulty and practice bit comes into play. Imagine this... if you're in a brawl and need to twist away from incoming fire, you lose the lock. You'd need to lock onto the target again and then and only then, would you be able to fire the Streaks. With the Tag guidance system, you simply use Streaks like SRMs but with an added bonus of being in control of their flight path. You simply aim at the mech and fire. If you're proficient, you'll make full use of the Tag to steer the missiles in this short window.

I want this for TAG, but not the only way to play the homing missiles. It's situational, not great for everything.

FRAGTAST1C, on 12 July 2019 - 01:34 AM, said:

Similar to the Pulse lasers sweeping the legs of the light mechs, with Tag guidances added to Streaks, you can just aim at the legs and fire. You do not need to worry about locks. Streaks will behave like SRMs but now, you have a slightly better flight path 'cause of the Tag.

Except shorter range and longer time-to-target, which makes it the worse approach to do so.

[PhoenixFire55]

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 01:44 AM, said:

You do realize I was pointing out base, as in before modifications. Obviously it's shorter with LOS, obviously it's longer with distance and/or ECM. You might as well point out wrong spellings in my sentences with that kind of nitpicking.

Huh? ... So your "baseline" for Streak lock time is taken from an indirect lock? ... And somehow thats normal and I'm nitpicking?

Whatever really. Your entire thread is basically about lock times and yet me discussing said lock times is nitpicking. Devil is in the details m8, and it seems that you didn't think yours through.

[The6thMessenger]

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 01:58 AM, said:

Huh? ... So your "baseline" for Streak lock time is taken from an indirect lock? ... And somehow thats normal and I'm nitpicking?

Yes, because that's how PGI treats it. Do I even need to tell you how "about" is used too? As in "approximate"? 5.98s is "about 6", it's not 6, but it's about 6. And you just tunnel-visioned on that while trying to dismiss me (as opposed of challenging the idea) due to your perceived erroneous detail.

Likewise, you can prelock streaks behind cover and then just pop up when you could show your volley. Quite a surprise for Lights really.

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 01:58 AM, said:

Whatever really. Your entire thread is basically about lock times and yet me discussing said lock times is nitpicking. Devil is in the details m8, and it seems that you didn't think yours through.

I've thought this through, but we can't give any solid numbers because it's a new territory, the details which I left vague and open for testing.

You're not discussing, you're criticizing me for an example of 2s baseline and got too hung up on it, when you're supposed to either give longer or shorter, not completely dismiss it because of some value you didn't want. It's all about the concept after all.

If you think it should be shorter, then say that it should be shorter. Like if you want SSRM36 doing 3s of lock-time.

But you know what, whatever lets you sleep at night m8.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 12 July 2019 - 02:28 AM.

[FRAGTAST1C]

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 01:51 AM, said:

So it's pseudo SRMs now? Could your idea even do my taxes?

Likewise wouldn't it makes sense that the SSRMs are supposedly for outranging SRMs in the first place? I mean it works well for the CSSRMs over CSRMs.


So basically you only start the timer when you're staring at the target?

Right so it's an even worse ATM now?


Except shorter range and longer time-to-target, which makes it the worse approach to do so.

See, if you fire from 250m out, you get time to steer the missile anyway you want. If you're brawling and want to twist away from incoming fire, you have the option to do that as well. The Tag guidance allows for both. There's no need to lock-on. This is the differentiating fact between Streaks and SRMs in my scenario.

Also, how is it worse than ATMs? You don't have a minimum range. You can blindfire and guide it or aim and guide the missiles without needing to lock on.

Shorter range to Pulse Lasers? Yes. But you do not need to be extremely precise when aiming the Streaks but if you are, then they work better than SRMs.

[The6thMessenger]

FRAGTAST1C, on 12 July 2019 - 02:44 AM, said:

See, if you fire from 250m out, you get time to steer the missile anyway you want. If you're brawling and want to twist away from incoming fire, you have the option to do that as well. The Tag guidance allows for both. There's no need to lock-on. This is the differentiating fact between Streaks and SRMs in my scenario.

Sure you got differentiation. But guess what, you still get to launch a volley willy-nilly, and twist and turn. 260 to 280 m/s is still serviceable at 100 meters if not best. Now you got an SSRM with relatively no weakness unlike before that requires lock to fire, which means you're screwed against ECM.

Also, can i shoot enemies in the back by only homing when they were already overshot?

FRAGTAST1C, on 12 July 2019 - 02:44 AM, said:

Also, how is it worse than ATMs? You don't have a minimum range. You can blindfire and guide it or aim and guide the missiles without needing to lock on.

Oh my got, you're right. Let me rephrase that though, worse LRM. Because you could theoretically hit targets at a long range.

FRAGTAST1C, on 12 July 2019 - 02:44 AM, said:

Shorter range to Pulse Lasers? Yes. But you do not need to be extremely precise when aiming the Streaks but if you are, then they work better than SRMs.

You don't have to be extremely precise, but you still have to still be precise nonetheless, which still defeats the point of a homing weapon.

Like I said, I'd rather just have this for TAG as a situational approach, not the norm.

[Prototelis]

God. Just **** already.

Both of your ideas are bad.

[jjm1]

[Sjorpha]

Clan streaks are fine, IS streaks could use a range buff. None of them needs any nerfs.

Making locks sequential seems horrible to me, no thanks.

[dario03]

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 01:44 AM, said:

I see. So this is basically just the personal validation, and distinction from the low-skill? So how would it work on high-skill? Won't you agree that it wouldn't matter because whether it's SSRMs or HGRs, you'd nuke the light all the same because you'd be landing either volleys?

It's funny how when people can't aim, it's "git-gud", but when lights can't dodge missiles it's "why SSRMs counter Lights?". It's versus crutch of speed versus crutch of auto-aim. It's hilarious when if it's direct-fire, we balance by people that use it best. But when it's auto-aim, we have to balance it by potato.

The HGR being able to nuke a light is part of the point. The game already has plenty of ways to kill lights, we don't need auto-aim weapons set up in a way that mostly makes them counter lights too. Or we at least don't need them to be as good as they are. Currently even at high level of play streaks see a decent amount of use, they have even been banned in some drops and comps because they overperform vs lighter mechs and/or are boring to watch/play because it doesn't showcase skill in a skill based competition.

Quote

Only if I get a 200-ton urbie, and nobody else.

No, but you can have the auto assault headshotting weapon, everybody can. Won't you agree that headshotting mechs is harder than hitting a light? And assaults don't get one shotted through the ct by dual hgr shots like a flea or piranha does... So why don't we just put in a light weight weapon that auto headshots assaults? If streaks are needed because people can't hit lights, why not have a weapon that counters the strengths of assaults with auto-aim too? Maybe we could just change streaks to automatically headshot assaults. I'm sure that will be lots of fun for assault pilots. If they complain we can just tell them its their fault for not using their range to kill the enemy before it auto headshot them by looking in their general direction for a bit. Oh and we can make streaks bad against the other classes and tell the assaults that they should just have their allies take care of them.

Quote

Because it's the goddamn point? it's the niche, it's the deterrent, it achieves a role.

And why is it the point? Why can't we have another niche or just not make the weapon so specific? Why do we need streaks countering lights instead of streaks countering assaults or just being balanced?

Edited by dario03, 12 July 2019 - 03:58 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

dario03, on 12 July 2019 - 03:28 AM, said:

The HGR being able to nuke a light is part of the point. The game already has plenty of ways to kill lights, we don't need auto-aim weapons set up in a way that mostly makes them counter lights too. Or we at least don't need them to be as good as they are. Currently even at high level of play streaks see a decent amount of use, they have even been banned in some drops and comps because they overperform vs lighter mechs and/or are boring to watch/play because it doesn't showcase skill in a skill based competition.

Okay, so in my setup which completely makes it harder for streak-boats to do so, why are you putting the problem down in my doorstep? But okay, sure, I'm kind of on the side of streaks being there for the role, well that's just about it.

It's not just about the skill, it's about the role they play in what supposedly a team game, such as if you have a specialist, you could lighten the load and leave the light-hunting in the hands of the one most geared towards it instead of putting a heavier set to deal with it.

If you're looking at me, arguing that Streaks should be removed from game, you're barking up the wrong tree.

dario03, on 12 July 2019 - 03:28 AM, said:

No, but you can have the auto assault headshotting weapon, everybody can. Won't you agree that headshotting mechs is harder than hitting a light?

So what role does it serve? Lets auto headshot 12 people in quick succession, that'll be a good game innit?

dario03, on 12 July 2019 - 03:28 AM, said:

If streaks are needed because people can't hit lights, why not have a weapon that counters the strengths of assaults with auto-aim too?

Probably because you aren't meant to, by game design. I mean why do we need to have a net in the middle of the tennis court?

As I've said before, it's about the role they were to do. The best way to counter an assault is just a hell lot of fire-power, focus-fire even. The lights on the other hand, it's aim right? You don't need overwhelming firepower, you need aim and just as it's easy to put a hell lot of weapons in a mech, it's easy to just put streak and forgo aim. So there you go.

And then there's the matter of out-maneuvering the assaults, piranha on the back is already a counter to the assaults so there's that.

dario03, on 12 July 2019 - 03:28 AM, said:

And why is it the point? Why can't we have another niche or just not make the weapon so specific? Why do we need streaks countering lights instead of streaks countering assaults or just being balanced?

Because it serves such specific role. It makes better sense with objective-based modes.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 12 July 2019 - 04:28 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

Yes, because that's how PGI treats it.

So? ... If they decide to be *redacted* then we should follow suit and be *redacted* too? ... Suit yourself, but I'll pass.

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

Do I even need to tell you how "about" is used too? As in "approximate"? 5.98s is "about 6", it's not 6, but it's about 6. And you just tunnel-visioned on that while trying to dismiss me (as opposed of challenging the idea) due to your perceived erroneous detail.

5.98s is "about" 6s. 0.5s is not "about" 2s.

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

Likewise, you can prelock streaks behind cover and then just pop up when you could show your volley. Quite a surprise for Lights really.

LOL ... Such a likely scenario. Yes, of course, lets balance this sh*te around lights who park under UAVs or don't have a clue about losing locks. Good grief ... A streakboat poking at lights. Honestly, that made my day, my week even, and will probably make my month unless you'll keep arguing your "point" here further ...

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

I've thought this through

Yeah, I can see that ^^. I kinda question your thinking process tho.

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

You're not discussing, you're criticizing me for an example of 2s baseline and got too hung up on it, when you're supposed to either give longer or shorter, not completely dismiss it because of some value you didn't want.

I've told you exactly why your idea is bad like 2 pages ago. It only becomes more obviously flawed since you've clearly shown that its based on false assumptions, one of which I simply pointed out. You keep defending it tho with some sort of weird scenarios that are either unlikely to happen and are quite fraknly stupid if they do happen. Seems rather strange to me to balance anything around anecdotes, but hey ... knock yourself out.

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 02:09 AM, said:

If you think it should be shorter, then say that it should be shorter. Like if you want SSRM36 doing 3s of lock-time.

I think we got enough idiotic crutches with ghost heat as it is. If Streaks were too good, then their ghost heat would be higher. Since it isn't it means its not an issue. I got hardpoints on my mechs and I'd like to use them however I want to, not being forced to build dumb frankenmechs with 10 weapongroups or chainfire everything. And that goes for streaks, PPCs, lasers, Gauss rifles and everything else.

Edited by PhoenixFire55, 12 July 2019 - 04:36 AM.

[The6thMessenger]

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

So? ... If they decide to be *redacted* then we should follow suit and be *redacted* too? ... Suit yourself, but I'll pass.

You're too hung up on specifics.

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

5.98s is "about" 6s. 0.5s is not "about" 2s.

Fine. SSRM18 is at 0.5s Lock-time, SSRM36 is at 1.0s. Now do your thing.

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

LOL ... Such a likely scenario. Yes, of course, lets balance this sh*te around lights who park under UAVs or don't have a clue about losing locks. Good grief ... A streakboat poking at lights. Honestly, that made my day, my week even, and will probably make my month unless you'll keep arguing your "point" here further ...

I just said it you can do that. I never said that it's exactly what happens every game.

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

Yeah, I can see that ^^. I kinda question your thinking process tho.

Out of the box, and doing what hasn't been done.

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

I've told you exactly why your idea is bad like 2 pages ago.

Two pages ago? It's actually three, meanwhile you have to nitpick me for 'about 2s".

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

I think we got enough idiotic crutches with ghost heat as it is.

PGI does bad things with GH, and a lot of things in the game really, that's not a good argument.

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

If Streaks were too good, then their ghost heat would be higher. Since it isn't it means its not an issue.

You mean lower? Or you mean higher heat multiplier?

Okay, sure, it's not an issue. The suggestion is to really just cater to the people that doesn't like Streaks for being a light-hunter. If you're fine with the light-nuking, then we're done.

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

It only becomes more obviously flawed since you've clearly shown that its based on false assumptions, one of which I simply pointed out. You keep defending it tho with some sort of weird scenarios that are either unlikely to happen and are quite fraknly stupid if they do happen. Seems rather strange to me to balance anything around anecdotes, but hey ... knock yourself out.

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 04:34 AM, said:

I got hardpoints on my mechs and I'd like to use them however I want to, not being forced to build dumb frankenmechs with 10 weapongroups or chainfire everything. And that goes for streaks, PPCs, lasers, Gauss rifles and everything else.

Lol k.

[PhoenixFire55]

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 04:48 AM, said:

Lol k.

Since you don't like nitpicking ... Several people already told you exactly why your suggestion is bad. You can be smart and give up your "outside of the box" thinking, or you can continue to be stubborn. Your call, I'm not gonna bother anymore, this thread isn't worth the time I've already spent here.

[The6thMessenger]

PhoenixFire55, on 12 July 2019 - 05:02 AM, said:

Since you don't like nitpicking ... Several people already told you exactly why your suggestion is bad. You can be smart and give up your "outside of the box" thinking, or you can continue to be stubborn. Your call, I'm not gonna bother anymore, this thread isn't worth the time I've already spent here.

Sure. Whatever you say m8.

[Navid A1]

The6thMessenger, on 11 July 2019 - 07:52 PM, said:

tl;dr you just don't want it. Ok.

Here's my 2-cents though, LRMs took reworking before it was fine. We could tweak the hell out of it's stats, but in the end only the dual-arc fixed it.

Same case here. Like I said, how do you balance against a class that relies completely on the failure of another? You can only go so far with stat changes, and it could just tweak the balance into unfun results like Clans being sluggish as hell. They already resorted to it by reducing lock-cone from 45 to 25, what's next reduce it to 1 degree?

No, I don't. Since I still play the game.

Everything you are suggesting appears to have the assumption that the game is being auto-played by computer AIs.

This is a semi-FPS. The system you are presenting looks like trying to order food on a 100 item menu, written in alien language, in the middle of a fight where seconds could decide the match result.

For ONE second, try imagining yourself or any human, playing it and you'll see what I mean.


You present convoluted mechanics that require additional convoluted mechanics to resolve it's issues which also brings about a new set of issues as consequence.

[dario03]

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 04:27 AM, said:

Okay, so in my setup which completely makes it harder for streak-boats to do so, why are you putting the problem down in my doorstep? But okay, sure, I'm kind of on the side of streaks being there for the role, well that's just about it.

It's not just about the skill, it's about the role they play in what supposedly a team game, such as if you have a specialist, you could lighten the load and leave the light-hunting in the hands of the one most geared towards it instead of putting a heavier set to deal with it.

If you're looking at me, arguing that Streaks should be removed from game, you're barking up the wrong tree.

I never said we should get rid of streaks. I said we should rebalance them so they are equal against classes or stronger vs the stronger mechs and weaker vs the bigger mechs, so better vs assaults and heavies instead of lights and mediums. Basically the point I'm against is in your title "nerf streaks without losing niche". I think we absolutely should lose the niche or move it.

Quote

So what role does it serve? Lets auto headshot 12 people in quick succession, that'll be a good game innit?

It would serve the anti-assault role. Those are the stronger mechs in the game and if you lack aim are also hard to kill so why not? And we wouldn't be auto headshotting 12 enemies in a qp game unless the enemy brought 12 assaults. Its a basic example of switching effectiveness of the weapon from one class to the other, to show how absurd it currently is. Nobody would like it if the enemy could just auto aim kill their assault so easily.

Quote

Probably because you aren't meant to, by game design. I mean why do we need to have a net in the middle of the tennis court?

That's not much of an answer, you could say that for any change somebody suggests. We are talking about changing the game and changing streak effectiveness isn't much of a change. Actually I would say the rebalance ideas I suggested are less of a change than your lock on suggestion.

Quote

As I've said before, it's about the role they were to do. The best way to counter an assault is just a hell lot of fire-power, focus-fire even. The lights on the other hand, it's aim right? You don't need overwhelming firepower, you need aim and just as it's easy to put a hell lot of weapons in a mech, it's easy to just put streak and forgo aim. So there you go.

And when was it written in stone that streaks should be an anti-light weapon? So assaults should only be countered by lots of guns and multiple enemies but lights should be countered by that, plus countered by less weapons, plus countered by auto aim for those that can't aim good? But we shouldn't let auto-aim be added to the list of counters for the higher performing assaults?
Because even if you have lots of guns you still need to aim well in order to beat an assault in a ~equal fight. Simply hitting an assault isn't enough to beat it, putting a couple hundred damage into the arms of a mostly torso weaponed assault is about as effective as missing most of your shots vs a light.

Quote

And then there's the matter of out-maneuvering the assaults, piranha on the back is already a counter to the assaults so there's that.

An assault killing the piranha far outside of its range or one shotting it when it comes in is a counter for that so theres that.

Quote

Because it serves such specific role. It makes better sense with objective-based modes.

Serving the role of anti-assault makes more sense since those are the stronger mechs in battle.

Edited by dario03, 12 July 2019 - 09:56 AM.

[Feral Clown]

The6thMessenger, on 12 July 2019 - 12:49 AM, said:

And why should it require the same amount of skills? The point of having different mechanic is to have different applications, which inevitably have different skills. The point of automation is forgoing a portion of the effort for something else that opens up to different uses because of strengths. And the effort could be alloted elsewhere, like having a second man in the Machine-Gun crew so the machine-gunner could focus shooting while another focus on reloading.

You might as well ban cars and bikes, because it will out-do sprint runners.



Why not? That is exactly the point, you could only either chainfire or low-level alpha the low-exposure lights, which adequately nerfs the SSRMs without them losing their niche. Due to being hinged on exposure level to damage, this also provides a bit of linear progression of effectiveness.

Likewise if you chain-fire, you do not have to suffer the hoopla of long lock-time which allows you to be better reactive. It's all about the options and how you want to play it.



And you're just going to say that without justification? Tell you what, maybe it is, why the **** would it adhere to the meta? Kind of the point of having different mechanics is you play it differently. Maybe stop boating so much missiles that you have to chain-fire.



Heat-capping is one thing, but you are still nuking the lights with an immense volley of SSRMs -- or other mechs with ATMs, and that was the point. Likewise this is just a concept, the 6s thing isn't necessarily set in stone -- it could be at 4s. Likewise you could partition your volleys, we're already doing that anyways.



Never said that they are, I just said it would be a compromise, an avenue for balance, because there are certain overperforming people who aren't fine with a supposedly cheap weapon against lights. It's ironic really, they tell other people to git-gud, but when streaks are doing their job against lights, it's OP.



Good, then tell them that.

This idea is just an olive branch to them.

Wut? Yeah they should be same skill level because they are in the same race to use your analogy. Sprint cars don't race superbikes in the the same race...for good reason. You can have weapons that are different but to have them all on the same playing field you definitely want them in the same realm of difficulty since they are competing against each other on that field.

Why not? I already said why, chain firing is bad. So not a fair or reasonable trade off and anyone who is near or close to competent would never use them then, which mean the why not is because it would remove their usefulness and usage from the game.

And why would it adhere to meta....to not be useless. Boating is a thing and forcing bracket builds cause you be all anti-meta, is weak. The justification is to not make them utter garbage and delete their usage completely.

Honestly, sometimes you have good ideas (like doing something about under performing ppc classes) but this just isn't one of them. I don't think this is at all a reasonable compromise for a weapon that does only one thing well and isn't over powered at that.

I am sure you can come up with some other idea that doesn't involve such a convoluted mechanic and forced chainfire or whatnot. This idea would ruin a weapon that doesn't need ruining. As I said, I am much more interested in PGI making it far harder to maintain a lock without the skill of tracking properly/tightly.

[Xeno Phalcon]

Nothing with 'ghost' in it as a solution in MWO has ever been a good idea, they already have ghost heat attached to them, thats doubling down - also known as: