45 replies to this topic

[Lex Peregrine]

I have a sugestion that should limit a bit the missile boats some people seem to exploit.

I'll give a practical example, looking at smurfy-net's mechlab I notice the Catapult A1 has 3 missile hard points in each arm, this makes the shotgun catapult possible, with 6 SRM6s.

Im not going to cry this variant is OP, my point is this:

each arm has 3 hard points, but the original loadout of this chassis' variant has an LRM15 in each arm, thats 15 launch tubes, so in my opinion, we should be allowed to use the 3 hard points until a maximun of 15 missiles, so we could use 3 SRM4 (=12) but not 3 SRM6 (=18). Get my point?

The Awesome 9M for instances has a sSRM2 in the arm, I notice when I put an SRM6 in it, it fires 2 missiles at a time to justify the ability to fire 6 missiles from 2 tubes. Thats just unrealistic, its like having an SRM2 with ultra fast reload rate. Instead it should limit to only SRM2 or NARC.

While im at it, AMS should be more powerfull, now that LRMs are fashio again, they're worthless. Perhaps the solution could be higher rate of fire, and a bit more ammo per ton, so they get a good chance of cleaning 75% of an LRM20 salvo (not two, that was an example) but will eventually run dry if there are too many boats. That would also make a good tactical choice in an 8-man group, to have for instances an Atlas K with 2 AMS and half a dozen tons of ammo to protect its team mates

And I think its unfair to have streaks completely useless against ECM, perhaps allow them to work only at very close range, or increase drastically their lock on time, making it a pain to hit those pesky ravens.

[Syllogy]

Lex Peregrine, on 28 February 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

And I think its unfair to have streaks completely useless against ECM, perhaps allow them to work only at very close range, or increase drastically their lock on time, making it a pain to hit those pesky ravens.

Streaks aren't useless against ECM. You can still get a target lock between 180m and 250m, up to 270m with TAG.

If you don't rely on Streaks, ECM won't be a problem to begin with

[Lex Peregrine]

Yea you got a point

[FerrolupisXIII]

interesting suggestion, though it would make only one hunchback, one catapult, one stalker, and 3 of the atlas's capable of mounting the LRM-20. and only the Catapult and Stalker would be able to have more than one.

[Lex Peregrine]

FerrolupisXIII, on 28 February 2013 - 09:37 AM, said:

interesting suggestion, though it would make only one hunchback, one catapult, one stalker, and 3 of the atlas's capable of mounting the LRM-20. and only the Catapult and Stalker would be able to have more than one.

Perfect!

and that will make those mechs even more special!

[focuspark]

I ... uh ... yeah, well... but... dammit, this actually makes sense. It has my vote.

However, I'd like to make a number of tubes per body section. One of the Atlas frames has three SRM6 in it, it should also support a single LRM15.

Oh, and perhaps to not let tubes go idle larger racks should be allowed but under perform (warning displayed in mechlab of course). Example: same Atlas frame has 18 tubes, place in a single LRM20 but it behaves like a LRM18.

[Lex Peregrine]

I like

and its a way to make people's configs remain valid, but sugest they review them.
In the case of the shotgun Cat, if one puts 3 SRM6 in the arm with 15 tubes, one of the SRM6 would only fire half their missiles, but it would still weight 3 tons (1.5 wasted), so one would do better by changing it for an SRM4 and only loose 1 missile (but still waste 0.5 tons). Good solution.

[Markis Steiner]

Lex Peregrine, on 28 February 2013 - 08:51 AM, said:

The Awesome 9M for instances has a sSRM2 in the arm, I notice when I put an SRM6 in it, it fires 2 missiles at a time to justify the ability to fire 6 missiles from 2 tubes. Thats just unrealistic, its like having an SRM2 with ultra fast reload rate. Instead it should limit to only SRM2 or NARC.

This also happens in the RVN-3L (I do not use Streaks) and the TBT-7M. It can make for some wonky firing situations. In the 7M you can fire an LRM10 from the left torso slot and it will continue to fire one missile at a time until it fires the full salvo before it starts reloading. In the same firing duration I can fire an LRM20 and have it's reload cycle almost finished by the time the LRM10 is done.

I would find it interesting if they worked all missile racks this way, but that would horribly gimp most catapult variants, and hurt a lot more mechs in the process. They need to fix the missile tube situation. They could make it so the tubes change to reflect the weapon in the slot. I think the only way to do that with the Catapult would be to give it bigger ears.

[blinkin]

this would make my catapult c4 significantly more valuable because it would be entirely unaffected as an SRM cat, but this would ruin my LRM hunchback (HBK - 4SP with 2xLRM20). i actually chose my hunchback because i like the way it pulses out missiles. i can send out a steady stream of missiles with chain fire instead of one lump hit.

my suggestion would be to instead limit the number of missile tubes that can be used at once, much like my hunchback. so if a catapult A1 with 6x SRM6 fires the missiles would come out in 2 pulses. the first pulse would be 30 missiles and the second pulse would be the remaining 6 missiles.

i have a jenner with 2x SRM4, but it only has 4 missile tubes. it still fires 8 missiles at one time with those 4 tubes. if we keep seperate launchers from redundantly using tubes i think many of these problems with specific builds would be reduced if not removed.

[Hanith]

This does indeed make some sense. I'm sure it will take some trickey fanagling with code to get this to function as suddenly missiles will be a completely different object when compated to ballistic or energy weapons. It would make for a nice fluffy solution without completely gimping the comcept. Perhaps we can see a similar application on Lasers vs. PPCs (or at least an astetic change on the mech).

[FerrolupisXIII]

Just thought id point out the obvious with the LRM-20. i do like the idea, though it does seem to end up being more of a nerf to LRM's than SRM's. can still stack up quite a few SRM's on most of the mechs with lots of missile hardpoints.

the best you could get for mass LRM would still be a stalker, the 3h. 2x LRM-20 and 2x LRM-5. would fit your requirements and still be hurling 50 missiles down range

[Lex Peregrine]

Yes there are some mechs that are meant to be missile boats, such as the Stalker, not much we can do there. But at least it would get rid of a few exploits and make things more logical, missile-wise.

[Strig]

TUBES LIMITS LAUNCHERS
PROS:

• It makes sense.
  
• It would reduce the Raven-3L to a single SSRM2 launcher (as the Narc it comes with in the LT has 1 launcher tube ... thus NARC or nothing there ...)
  
• It would reduce the A1 splatcat in power a little bit (30 SRMs per volley rather than 36 would still make it very scary, but a bit less insane).
  
• It would do nothing to limit the A1 streakapult .. but that has suffered so many nerfs from ECM, random hit location, etc that it really is more of a situational/nuisance build
  
• Greatly reduces the number of chassis that support LRM20s (less LRM spam is a good thing)
  
• Moderately reduces the number of chassis that support LRM15s (less LRM spam is a good thing)
  
• Makes certain chassis more special because they have more tubes

CONS:

• Limits some flexibility in builds .. but only a little.
  
• Can't think of any more at the moment ...

Actually has my vote ... even though I enjoy the A1 splatcat.


+1

Edited by Strig, 28 February 2013 - 11:26 AM.

[Strig]

As to the making AMS stronger, there is a nice suggestion here http://mwomercs.com/...module-upgrade/ which uses modules to increase AMS functionality. Whether the original poster's idea is the one to go with or not is debatable, but the module idea is pretty cool.

[Lex Peregrine]

Yes thats also a good idea, although I still think standard AMS right now is too weak.

Thanks Strig!

[blinkin]

blinkin, on 28 February 2013 - 10:46 AM, said:

this would make my catapult c4 significantly more valuable because it would be entirely unaffected as an SRM cat, but this would ruin my LRM hunchback (HBK - 4SP with 2xLRM20). i actually chose my hunchback because i like the way it pulses out missiles. i can send out a steady stream of missiles with chain fire instead of one lump hit.

my suggestion would be to instead limit the number of missile tubes that can be used at once, much like my hunchback. so if a catapult A1 with 6x SRM6 fires the missiles would come out in 2 pulses. the first pulse would be 30 missiles and the second pulse would be the remaining 6 missiles.

i have a jenner with 2x SRM4, but it only has 4 missile tubes. it still fires 8 missiles at one time with those 4 tubes. if we keep seperate launchers from redundantly using tubes i think many of these problems with specific builds would be reduced if not removed. also players would not be directly limited on what they could build. -edit-

anyone?

[Lex Peregrine]

But you see, why would the remaining 6 missiles fire after the full volley, that means 3 tubes on each side would have a faster reload than the remaining tubes, it breaks the logic of my original post, although I apreciate your contribution.

[focuspark]

blinkin, on 28 February 2013 - 10:46 AM, said:

this would make my catapult c4 significantly more valuable because it would be entirely unaffected as an SRM cat, but this would ruin my LRM hunchback (HBK - 4SP with 2xLRM20). i actually chose my hunchback because i like the way it pulses out missiles. i can send out a steady stream of missiles with chain fire instead of one lump hit.

my suggestion would be to instead limit the number of missile tubes that can be used at once, much like my hunchback. so if a catapult A1 with 6x SRM6 fires the missiles would come out in 2 pulses. the first pulse would be 30 missiles and the second pulse would be the remaining 6 missiles.

i have a jenner with 2x SRM4, but it only has 4 missile tubes. it still fires 8 missiles at one time with those 4 tubes. if we keep seperate launchers from redundantly using tubes i think many of these problems with specific builds would be reduced if not removed.

I was under the impression that this was a bug to be fixed. It would go wonderfully towards nerfing SRM boats (in some cases) but doesn't do much for LRM as they're nearly fire and forget anyways.

Still - would be better than what we have now.

[MasterErrant]

the fix as discussed elsewhere is to make the hardpoints work like the MW4 mode. IE each mech has hardpoints which are designed to do certain things. The Hunchie has a cluster of seven or eight internals which can only carry ballistics... The catapult's arem can only carry missiles and related gear. (This system works well enough that I would impliment it in a TT campaign.) there is nothhing wrong with splat cats. or anty other "Boats" it's the maps and game physics that fail. the hardpoint system is stupid and illogical. and the game physics, heat and hardpoints favour light fast mechs.

has anyone considered that the odd firing rate is actually a graphics quirk in a half finished game?
And that not all launchers work the same?
I mean a cat's LRM15s have 15 tudes but an Atlas' has five. a warhanners SRM6 has six tudes a Crusaders has three

Edited by MasterErrant, 28 February 2013 - 12:04 PM.

[MQ9 Reaper Predator Drone]

and what about those 9 slot flashlight boats ?
nerfing misile hp's is going to badly imbalance the game if you consider the 4-5x PPC builds or the 4x5 ac's