74 replies to this topic

[GeneralArmchair]

strikebrch, on 30 March 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

Considering battletech is a mix of primitive , contenporary and future technologies i will not be amazed if theres something that doesn't allow lasers to have that instant lock effect.

Remember we're talking about GECM system here. Not only should it have no effect on TAG, it also shouldn't have any effect whatsoever on vanilla LRM indirect fire.

[ShinVector]

Chagatay, on 30 March 2015 - 10:08 PM, said:

TAG should be:
Hooray, I have saved the day (even non-LRM people would use it for the sweet c-bill shower)

It was fun while it lasted, when rewards 2.0 came and TAG was literally a Cbill mining laser.

[Chagatay]

ShinVector, on 30 March 2015 - 10:13 PM, said:

It was fun while it lasted, when rewards 2.0 came and TAG was literally a Cbill mining laser.

Yes it was.

[Telmasa]

The only cure to ECM problems in this game is to perform the guardian/angel ECM swap that's already got its own thread(s) here on the forums.

[Burktross]

strikebrch, on 30 March 2015 - 08:00 PM, said:

That's a funny way to say "WE GOT RECKT" lol

Yes, because I cannot efectrively communicate with my team, silly fedrat.
You know TCAF?
Yeah, you know TCAF.
They're all Russian, and they comprise 90% of CW liao drops.
I've only understood one guy in TCAF.

The rest of my experiences with TCAF is in their TS. One guy was like, "Eh, macarone."
They all started ******* flipping out and laughing. I don't even.

I don't speak Macarone Russian! :^C

[Sir Wulfrick]

Irrespective of ECM the LRM is always going to be one of the most difficult weapons to balance because at beginner levels they appear to be press-here-to-win doom weapons whereas at the upper ELO leves they're so unreliable as to be almost never used. Not sure what the answer is to one case without them becoming devastatingly unbalanced at the other end of the scale.

[wanderer]

TAG designator boosting like that would basically turn the standard LRM into the "semi-guided" LRM ammo type. I wouldn't complain, mind you...except lockons shouldn't be hosed by ECM in the first place. But they will be, because it has no effect on the meta.

[DrxAbstract]

Coming from someone that isn't very fond using or fighting against LRMs, TAG locks should be sped up and the beam should be invisible save for the point of origin and 'impact point', both appearing as bright red dots.

AMS is too weak, ECM is too strong. But something has to be strong because LRMs resemble the wrath of god when there's nothing in their way. The fundamental issue with that is the extremes of protection against them; AMS isnt used because it takes a 3 to 1 ratio of AMS carrying Mechs vs LRM carriers to provide 'moderate' defense against LRMs. 4 LRM Mechs on the enemy team... Unless you have 12 Mechs with AMS and ammo-a-plenty for it, it's going to be unpleasant. This is why ECM is unfortunately so important and why when ECM gets shut down via UAVs, NARC or Tag, the result is catastrophic for the target. ECM is not an 'active defense', AMS is. AMS is just too weak to be useful though, and ECM has other bonuses. That Clans have an abundance of ECM and soon the IS (Without requiring a massive tonnage differential to do it, that is), LRMs simply wont be useful in most CW matches versus the current situation where they are mildly useful for Clans against IS drops.

So... ECM needs to be weaker, AMS needs to be stronger. Reduce the passive defense, increase the active defense.

And...

Am I the only one that realizes LRM Launchers have different manufacturers and by extension different types just like Autocannons do, being grouped based on damage per volley, not missile count? An LRM launcher on a vehicle isnt the same as the one on a Mech. Mech-mounted LRMs are micro-missiles, being much smaller than depicted in game and by comparison to say, an AGM-114(Which existed when Btech was created and probably the inspiration behind LRMs), a quarter of the size with a comparable effective damage payload at extremely reduced range with rudimentary guidance hardware... That's how you fit thousands of them in a bloody Mech.

[Ghogiel]

Bush Hopper, on 30 March 2015 - 12:23 AM, said:

Haven't the "pros" of the forum agreed that missiles are weak and useless and only nubs die or are hindered by them?

Don't know about forum pros... but the pros of the game have.

If you disagree enter your unit in RHoD or something and prove otherwise.

ggclose

[Novawrecker]

DrxAbstract, on 31 March 2015 - 01:55 PM, said:

Coming from someone that isn't very fond using or fighting against LRMs .... AMS is too weak.

Nothing stopping you, and the group you run with, from running with multiple AMS mechs

DrxAbstract, on 31 March 2015 - 01:55 PM, said:

.... AMS isnt used because it takes a 3 to 1 ratio of AMS carrying Mechs vs LRM carriers to provide 'moderate' defense against LRMs ...

Although it is true that one has to sport several AMS to offset the absurd amount of missiles fired off, it is not 3:1 (or greater) as you put it. Mechs with dual AMS mounts work VERY effectively vs. missiles. Obviously the more missiles they bring, the more AMS that also has to be brought (C'mon now, don't expect 2 AMS to fend off 4+ mechs vomiting missiles all by their lonesome).

ECM, with how powerful it is (and still very useful to run with) is ridiculously easy to counter and is no longer a great deterrent vs. missiles exclusively. They perform their other jobs flawlessly, but to stave off missiles single-handed? Nay,

Edited by Novawrecker, 31 March 2015 - 02:57 PM.

[Col Jaime Wolf]

strikebrch, on 30 March 2015 - 03:13 PM, said:

Considering battletech is a mix of primitive , contenporary and future technologies i will not be amazed if theres something that doesn't allow lasers to have that instant lock effect.

Mechs wouldnt work without at least modern 20th century computers operatiing them. they have to intelligently move their legs, ankles and in some case toes to conform to terrain. secondly it doesnt matter whether you have radar from WWII or 3050. the way painting a target with a laser works is by design very simple. the laser hits the target, the tracking system sees the laser and aims at it there isnt even really a target locking process it just homes in on the laser. very very simple. in fact the germans could have easily made and deployed laser tracking munitions in WWII with the simple computers they had at the time. the real problem was laser optics and refinement of batteries to power these high intensity lasers.

there is no excuse the very nature of painting lasers and laser guided munitions makes them fast lock-on and simple to deploy (once you are able to reliably manufacture the laser optics).

Gyrok, on 30 March 2015 - 03:21 PM, said:

I was talking about large scale missile systems, such as cruise missiles that have bordering on intercontinental range, I am sure the systems on weapon systems that have much lower range are probably a bit different...

except that mechs arent usually slinging ICBMS (Arrow IV aside). granted big missles might take a few minutes to punch coord in.

again i will state this simply. unless a mech has mirror armor of some kind, or light absorbing armor of some kind an ECM will have no effect on targeting at all. and a mech may not even need its computer to lock onto target because its actaully the missles homing in on the painted target it has nothing to do with target locks or anything.

if the missles are controled by the mech itself they would go dead the instant they entered the ECM range. but its far more likely that the missles are self guided and the mech is painting the target with either radar or a laser.

you would also be able to do neat things like lob missles into the air THEN paint a target and watch them home in.

Edited by Mellifluer, 31 March 2015 - 03:34 PM.

[Tesunie]

I have seen 1 AMS take down an LRM10 launcher. AMS is not a problem. Take more than one, and it becomes very effective.

[DrxAbstract]

Novawrecker, on 31 March 2015 - 02:52 PM, said:

Nothing stopping you, and the group you run with, from running with multiple AMS mechs

Except there is. The obvious fact LRMs are ineffective weapons in CW and largely in Pugs as well. The only time they're ever truly effective is with several Mechs running them with spotting and your team (Typically not Clan opposition) is short on ECM. This makes AMS a waste of tonnage and space the MAJORITY of the time. Yes, anyone can name that ONE time they were sent to Spectator by sun-blocking LRM spam. A singular, unique, exception-to-the-rule event. The MAJORITY of the time, AMS is not worth taking. So the sake of playing efficient and effective builds is stopping me.

Quote

Although it is true that one has to sport several AMS to offset the absurd amount of missiles fired off, it is not 3:1 (or greater) as you put it. Mechs with dual AMS mounts work VERY effectively vs. missiles. Obviously the more missiles they bring, the more AMS that also has to be brought (C'mon now, don't expect 2 AMS to fend off 4+ mechs vomiting missiles all by their lonesome).

ECM, with how powerful it is (and still very useful to run with) is ridiculously easy to counter and is no longer a great deterrent vs. missiles exclusively. They perform their other jobs flawlessly, but to stave off missiles single-handed? Nay,

Name a single Dual/Triple AMS-mounting Mech Chassis that is clearly viable in competitive team play or even in PUG matches. Deluding yourself into the mindset "Everything is ok because: options" Is just simple ignorance. None of those Mechs are valuable in any sense of the word. Perhaps if AMS shot down more missiles than you could count on your hand out of a salvo of 50+, and ECM wasnt so extremely effective yet simultaneously ineffective, it would be worthwhile. It's already evident it doesnt have the same tonnage-to-value ratio as ECM does while it serves one specific purpose... So why doesnt it do better than it currently does in the singular function it performs? It should be better.

And yes, it does require a ratio of 3 AMS per 1 LRM Mech to reduce/nullify LRM effectiveness. Feel free to test it.

Edited by DrxAbstract, 31 March 2015 - 06:30 PM.

[Tesunie]

DrxAbstract, on 31 March 2015 - 06:27 PM, said:

Name a single Dual/Triple AMS-mounting Mech Chassis that is clearly viable in competitive team play or even in PUG matches.

Thunderbolt TDR-9S.

PS: AMS also has some effectiveness on SSRMs as well, and has a chance to shoot some streaks down.

[Mcgral18]

Tesunie, on 31 March 2015 - 07:07 PM, said:

Thunderbolt TDR-9S.

PS: AMS also has some effectiveness on SSRMs as well, and has a chance to shoot some streaks down.

FS9-S as well, those stop lots of streaks in a pack.

[Tesunie]

Mcgral18, on 31 March 2015 - 07:35 PM, said:

FS9-S as well, those stop lots of streaks in a pack.

That's two Dual AMS mechs. Twice the requirement!

And I've seen, by the way, a single AMS destroy an entire LRM10 volley. How do I know? I was the one shooting the LRM10 volleys. Not a single missile hit... If one AMS can shoot down about 10 LRMs (circumstances permitting, as AMS effectiveness depends upon several factors), imagine what two can do? Or four?

I'd also like to remind, AMS is not suppose to be a "block all the missile" system. It's suppose to only mitigate missile damage. (It does only weight 0.5 tons, and 0.5 tons of ammo can feed it for some time. And it's often countering at least 5 tons of LRM system for 1 ton of AMS (excluding ammo).)

[DrxAbstract]

Tesunie, on 31 March 2015 - 07:41 PM, said:

That's two Dual AMS mechs. Twice the requirement!

And I've seen, by the way, a single AMS destroy an entire LRM10 volley. How do I know? I was the one shooting the LRM10 volleys. Not a single missile hit... If one AMS can shoot down about 10 LRMs (circumstances permitting, as AMS effectiveness depends upon several factors), imagine what two can do? Or four?

I'd also like to remind, AMS is not suppose to be a "block all the missile" system. It's suppose to only mitigate missile damage. (It does only weight 0.5 tons, and 0.5 tons of ammo can feed it for some time. And it's often countering at least 5 tons of LRM system for 1 ton of AMS (excluding ammo).)

I suppose i should have said name one that people actually install AMS. The TDR 9S - Good players do not install AMS on it. FS9 - Good players do not install AMS on it... Doubly so for the fact that's 2 tons on a Light Mech that already runs heavy on weapon tonnage.

You have yet to actually refute my point: AMS is not used competitively nor in the majority of PUGs because it's simply not worth the weight. Nobody said it needs to completely invalidate missile damage - It does need to do more than it currently does... Which is next to nothing.

[Lunatic_Asylum]

The more LRM are inhibited in firing, the better it is to avoid the LRM fire that prevents any action. The target acquisition speed is normal nowadays.

[Tesunie]

DrxAbstract, on 31 March 2015 - 08:54 PM, said:

It does need to do more than it currently does... Which is next to nothing.

Being able to shoot down a whole LRM10 with a single AMS is not "next to nothing". Your 1.5 tons (lets face it, most people slap a full ton of ammo in) negates 5+tons of LRMs. Just because 60-120+ LRMs are coming in for you doesn't mean AMS isn't doing it's job...

I keep hearing mixed messages from "competitive players". Some say LRMs are useless, which makes AMS useless. Where as others complain "they are so sick of LRMs". Guess it depends upon what is happening in the match, and how things get played.

[Mad Strike]

Mellifluer, on 31 March 2015 - 03:21 PM, said:

Mechs wouldnt work without at least modern 20th century computers operatiing them. they have to intelligently move their legs, ankles and in some case toes to conform to terrain. secondly it doesnt matter whether you have radar from WWII or 3050. the way painting a target with a laser works is by design very simple. the laser hits the target, the tracking system sees the laser and aims at it there isnt even really a target locking process it just homes in on the laser. very very simple. in fact the germans could have easily made and deployed laser tracking munitions in WWII with the simple computers they had at the time. the real problem was laser optics and refinement of batteries to power these high intensity lasers.

there is no excuse the very nature of painting lasers and laser guided munitions makes them fast lock-on and simple to deploy (once you are able to reliably manufacture the laser optics).



except that mechs arent usually slinging ICBMS (Arrow IV aside). granted big missles might take a few minutes to punch coord in.

again i will state this simply. unless a mech has mirror armor of some kind, or light absorbing armor of some kind an ECM will have no effect on targeting at all. and a mech may not even need its computer to lock onto target because its actaully the missles homing in on the painted target it has nothing to do with target locks or anything.

if the missles are controled by the mech itself they would go dead the instant they entered the ECM range. but its far more likely that the missles are self guided and the mech is painting the target with either radar or a laser.

you would also be able to do neat things like lob mietssles into the air THEN paint a target and watch them home in.

It's a different universe pal ,with its own set of rules.