Jump to content

Some Thoughts On Missile Systems


6 replies to this topic

Poll: Proposed Missile System Changes (2 member(s) have cast votes)

Do you agree with the OP's idea?

  1. Yes (2 votes [100.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 100.00%

  2. No (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

  3. Abstain (0 votes [0.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 0.00%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Solis Obscuri

    Don't Care How I Want It Now!

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The DeathRain
  • The DeathRain
  • 4,751 posts
  • LocationPomme de Terre

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:22 PM

I've always liked LRMs. I them since my first exposure to BT/MW, and I like PGI's interpretation of them in many regards. Frankly I just enjoy watching them float through the sky - one of my earliest memories of CB was watching clouds of slow, high-lofting LRMs drift across the sky on the new (at the time) Caustic Valley map. I also really appreciate the benefits of being able to provide fire-support for teammates without having direct LoS - especially when getting LoS often involves rushing to within 150m due to terrain on the maps we have. But in some ways, they are also a bit of a frustration.

LRMs are sort of a feast or famine system - against unwary targets without ECM in a map with decent open areas, they definitely can dominate, but against experienced players on a tighter map (with or without ECM), you can dump quite a few tons of ammo without scoring much more than glancing hits. On targets in the open you can use TAG to improve the accuracy of your shots, but beyond that there really isn't a lot you can do, besides engage at closer ranges to reduce response time. LRMs fired at 1000m are certainly menacing, but not terribly dangerous if you have any kind of situational awareness (getting tunnel vision while trying to direct-fire snipe at the tiny blue blips 1000m away will get you slaughtered, but it takes some real effort to ignore the flashing signs and Bitching Betty's admonishments these days!)

To put it simply, LRMs are a pretty good system, but they could be a better system with a few tweaks. Right now, very high per-missile damage is both compensating for low hit rates and causing missile-fire to act primarily as a suppression weapon - not entirely what I would've envisioned first reading the Commando and Raven descriptions. And, of course, Streaks are their own can of worms. Given my druthers, I would:
  • Reduce per-missile damage to 1.3 - 1.6 per missile, but increase flight speed to at least 250m/s. Odds of an insta-gib will be much lower, but chances for an initial hit will be much higher. Being able to shrug off a volley or two may be an option, but not a desirable one, as the threat from subsequent volleys will be greater. Firing without lock will also be more viable.
  • Change how lock-on works. At a minimum, reduce the distance from target bracket to reticule needed to hold lock. This won't affect LRMs all that much, as most long-range shooting requires minimal angular deflection, but it will make SSRMs a little more challenging.
  • Return spotting to requiring a spotter actually have the target, well, targeted. That's the way it used to work, but I'm pretty sure it's not the case any more.
  • Change LRM spread. The current default scatter is ok for direct-fire, and Artemis or TAG likewise currently provide a worthwhile improvement to grouping in direct-fire mode. But loosen the scatter for indirect-fire by around 50% (since we can already differentiate direct vs. indirect fire for Artemis, this shouldn't be an issue). Let TAG tighten the indirect-fire pattern back up to base direct-fire density. Let Narc beacons improve the pattern density equal to TAG/Artemis used in direct fire. This would both emphasize the advantages of good spotting over random slinging, and give Narc a worthwhile purpose.
  • Regarding SSRMs, increase the % chance of arm/leg hits and or lower the base damage. They still core 'mechs in any weight class way too fast just by being able to consistently score torso hits more often than any other weapon system.

Edited by Solis Obscuri, 09 April 2013 - 02:55 PM.


#2 Volthorne

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 1,929 posts
  • LocationCalgary, Canadia

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:34 PM

+9001

#3 focuspark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Ardent
  • The Ardent
  • 3,180 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 12:50 PM

I could accept this. +1

#4 Solis Obscuri

    Don't Care How I Want It Now!

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The DeathRain
  • The DeathRain
  • 4,751 posts
  • LocationPomme de Terre

Posted 20 March 2013 - 09:39 PM

Bumping this since missile systems seem to be a topic of discussion again.

#5 focuspark

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Ardent
  • The Ardent
  • 3,180 posts

Posted 20 March 2013 - 10:48 PM

Devs are only reading ideas with positive poll results now, so please add a poll { yes, no, abstain }

#6 TheRulesLawyer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,415 posts
  • LocationChicagoland

Posted 21 March 2013 - 08:32 PM

That's generally how missiles should be. Probably a more damage than post hotfix, but less than before tuesday. Significantly better tracking with more spread on hit. 60 tubes of lrm shouldn't be an insta gib, but you shouldn't be able to just charge a lrm boat either without thinking about cover, etc. I'd rather see better tracking come back than damage (though ammo per ton would need adjusting)

#7 Solis Obscuri

    Don't Care How I Want It Now!

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The DeathRain
  • The DeathRain
  • 4,751 posts
  • LocationPomme de Terre

Posted 09 April 2013 - 02:55 PM

View Postfocuspark, on 20 March 2013 - 10:48 PM, said:

Devs are only reading ideas with positive poll results now, so please add a poll { yes, no, abstain }

Good idea, thanks!





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users