#1
Posted 21 December 2014 - 03:41 PM
If somehow you're not sure what the benefit might be, it would be to free up some crit slots, particularly for LRM focused mechs (which have some issues sometimes with their huge launchers, especially with Artemis, and their need to pack in tons of ammo) but also for other mechs that might use a couple LRM tubes as a secondary weapon. An alternative solution would be to simply increase the amount of LRM ammo per ammo pack, but I'm not sure I agree with that because that starts to directly mess around with tonnage, and for the most part I think the tonnage when using LRMs is fine how it is.
As suggested in parentheses in the title, it could just be a 1.5 ton ammo pack with 270 missiles if there are concerns about a 2 ton ammo pack being too good, but the point is to give LRM mechs a little bit of relief and a 1.5 ton ammo pack would still help.
I'm only suggesting this for LRMs really because everything else that uses ammo is direct fire and, aside from SSRMs, doesn't spread damage like crazy either, so they generally don't require as much ammo.
#2
Posted 21 December 2014 - 04:03 PM
#3
Posted 21 December 2014 - 04:09 PM
We already have more ammo per ton for all weapons except SRMs than was in tabletop ... they shouldn't even have done that.
All ammo-using weapons are meant to be support weapons, not main weapons -- that's what energy are for.
Any attempt to make it easier to add more ammo to ammo-using weapons gets a HELL EFFING NO from me.
Edited by Durant Carlyle, 21 December 2014 - 04:11 PM.
#4
Posted 21 December 2014 - 04:19 PM
Edited by Kevjack, 21 December 2014 - 04:19 PM.
#5
Posted 21 December 2014 - 04:39 PM
Durant Carlyle, on 21 December 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:
We already have more ammo per ton for all weapons except SRMs than was in tabletop ... they shouldn't even have done that.
All ammo-using weapons are meant to be support weapons, not main weapons -- that's what energy are for.
Any attempt to make it easier to add more ammo to ammo-using weapons gets a HELL EFFING NO from me.
on most mechs energy are backup for when your main weapons run out of ammo...
#6
Posted 21 December 2014 - 04:50 PM
#7
Posted 21 December 2014 - 04:58 PM
There are more than enough anti-LRM threads without giving them more ammo (Pun intended) to have LRMS nerfed even more.
So No!
That is from someone who uses LRM's a lot.
#8
Posted 21 December 2014 - 05:12 PM
Durant Carlyle, on 21 December 2014 - 04:09 PM, said:
That's categorically incorrect. Energy weapons are NOT primary weapons, as they rapidly overheat all but the most dedicated Energy boats (and even dedicated energy boats get hot). Part of the reason Ballistics are so heavy is that they don't generate nearly as much heat, making them a superior choice for primary weapon than Energy.
Also, I think several Mechs would like a word with you, namely the HBK, KGC, BZK, BTZ, and FNR, among others...
Edited by Alek Ituin, 21 December 2014 - 05:13 PM.
#9
Posted 21 December 2014 - 05:17 PM
#10
Posted 21 December 2014 - 05:24 PM
RAM
ELH
#13
Posted 21 December 2014 - 07:27 PM
However, that might make the Lurmwolf too good. It is kinda hard to balance weapons while that mech is untouched.
Edited by El Bandito, 21 December 2014 - 07:31 PM.
#14
Posted 21 December 2014 - 08:21 PM
El Bandito, on 21 December 2014 - 07:27 PM, said:
However, that might make the Lurmwolf too good. It is kinda hard to balance weapons while that mech is untouched.
I kind of like that Artemis thought, since mechs with CT or HEad missile slots are screwed (even though I'm pretty sure you are supposed to be able to equip artemis in an adjoining section in some cases)
#16
Posted 21 December 2014 - 08:45 PM
Pjwned, on 21 December 2014 - 03:41 PM, said:
If somehow you're not sure what the benefit might be, it would be to free up some crit slots, particularly for LRM focused mechs (which have some issues sometimes with their huge launchers, especially with Artemis, and their need to pack in tons of ammo) but also for other mechs that might use a couple LRM tubes as a secondary weapon. An alternative solution would be to simply increase the amount of LRM ammo per ammo pack, but I'm not sure I agree with that because that starts to directly mess around with tonnage, and for the most part I think the tonnage when using LRMs is fine how it is.
As suggested in parentheses in the title, it could just be a 1.5 ton ammo pack with 270 missiles if there are concerns about a 2 ton ammo pack being too good, but the point is to give LRM mechs a little bit of relief and a 1.5 ton ammo pack would still help.
I'm only suggesting this for LRMs really because everything else that uses ammo is direct fire and, aside from SSRMs, doesn't spread damage like crazy either, so they generally don't require as much ammo.
I can tell you why in Tabletop the mechs need less tonnage for ammo.
Its because in Tabletop every Armor value and every internal structure value is half the value we have in this game. The Ammo per ton is about right in this game. The problem is Players very early on cried about the Time to kill beeing too short so they increased said values to double.
In tabletop for instance the Kingcrab has just as little ammo as in the stockbuild it has in MWO. the only difference is in Tabletop if you meet a Kingcrab for it to be able to use its 2 AC/20 on you chances are your mech is bits of smoldering scrap afterwards.
In MWO i have seen lights that should explode at the mere thought of getting hit by an AC/20 take 6+ hits from one.
So go figure.
Edited by Jack Corban, 21 December 2014 - 08:46 PM.
#17
Posted 21 December 2014 - 08:49 PM
Vassago Rain, on 21 December 2014 - 08:30 PM, said:
Bishop Steiner, on 21 December 2014 - 08:21 PM, said:
I kind of like that Artemis thought, since mechs with CT or HEad missile slots are screwed (even though I'm pretty sure you are supposed to be able to equip artemis in an adjoining section in some cases)
#18
Posted 21 December 2014 - 09:22 PM
Because 2,070 missiles isnt enough....lets find a way to be even more terribad and pack in 3,000, because, im bad, and I use huge lrm boats.
I have a mad dog, and 3243243 LRM5s on it, and I do great in pug challenge weekends, and I need MOAR AMMO.
Thankfully, I dont run this game, or id just ban the OP.
#19
Posted 21 December 2014 - 11:04 PM
KraftySOT, on 21 December 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:
Because 2,070 missiles isnt enough....lets find a way to be even more terribad and pack in 3,000, because, im bad, and I use huge lrm boats.
I have a mad dog, and 3243243 LRM5s on it, and I do great in pug challenge weekends, and I need MOAR AMMO.
Thankfully, I dont run this game, or id just ban the OP.
Added to my collection of "Ridiculous hyperboles uttered by LRM haters".
#20
Posted 21 December 2014 - 11:07 PM
Kevjack, on 21 December 2014 - 04:19 PM, said:
Assuming you mean a 2.5 ton ammo pack for ammo that would normally weigh 2 tons, that would not be a worthwhile trade-off at all.
LOADED, on 21 December 2014 - 04:50 PM, said:
That's a more complex change, I was going for something more subtle and simple.
slide, on 21 December 2014 - 04:58 PM, said:
If the system is flawed then it makes sense to want to change it, this applies to anything in the entire game.
I think the system is somewhat flawed in this case because while most weapons in MWO benefited quite a bit from being truly direct fire rather than a dice roll for hit locations, LRMs did not really benefit from that and they pay the price by being the most ammo intensive weapon system in the game if you want them to be effective. So not only do you need more LRM ammo despite not having any relief from armor values being doubled, the LRM launchers still take up a significant number of crit slots, particularly when you have Artemis launchers, and given that I think it's pretty reasonable to give people better options with crit slots if they have a number of LRM tubes.
Quote
So No!
That is from someone who uses LRM's a lot.
I'm more concerned about proper balance than how much people will complain.
Serial Peacemaker, on 21 December 2014 - 05:17 PM, said:
Part of the idea is to indirectly buff tonnage for LRM mechs by making endo/ferro an option if they were only short by a few crit slots before.
RAM, on 21 December 2014 - 05:24 PM, said:
RAM
ELH
Well, you do have to take into account that you don't roll the dice for hit locations, so for most weapons that makes up for the lack of doubled ammo, but that's not really the case for LRMs so I think they could use a bit of help.
Maybe just increasing the LRM ammo per ton is the right answer, but a number of people seem to disagree (and I'm not sure I agree myself) so I thought I would suggest a small buff that has a more subtle effect.
KraftySOT, on 21 December 2014 - 09:22 PM, said:
Because 2,070 missiles isnt enough....lets find a way to be even more terribad and pack in 3,000, because, im bad, and I use huge lrm boats.
I have a mad dog, and 3243243 LRM5s on it, and I do great in pug challenge weekends, and I need MOAR AMMO.
Thankfully, I dont run this game, or id just ban the OP.
That's not even close to what would happen if LRM mechs had a few more crit slots available, try exaggerating less. At best an LRM mech might have a few more tons to work with (usually more like ~1 ton, and only on certain builds) because of endo/ferro being an option; you might also like to know that the idea wouldn't really be a notable change with your Mad Dog.
Good thing I don't run the game or I might ban people who post stupid responses HURR HURF LOL XDDDDDDDDDDDDD EPIC
Edited by Pjwned, 22 December 2014 - 12:08 AM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users