174 replies to this topic

[Commander Kobold]

LRMs are stupidly easy to deal with, 1) you can take ECM/stay with neerby ECM carrier and be completely immune to them 2)you can take an AMS with any mech (except the X-5 for some reason) a reduce the amount of damage you take from LRMs 3) you can not stand in the open, the only time I really manage to kill anyone with my Catapult-C1 (4 med lasers 2lrm 20s) is when they're standing out in the open/I start firing into a brawl.

[Yokaiko]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 March 2013 - 02:08 PM, said:

I'm not saying they don't happen.

I played 6 games last night as an LRM boat. And like I said I don't stand behind things and fire, I go out and get LOS and try to stand about 400-500m and blow crap up. And didn't get any.

Maybe 2 LRM 15's isn't enough to do that? I don't know.

But I can show my statistics, 30% hit rate. Against PUG's. Not again really good players.

That seems fine.

Likely not, my stalker is traditionally light on the LRM boat scale....it slings 50 at a time, and vollies down an atlas in 3 strikes.

That is what 50 missiles with tag and artemis could do before the patch. Like I said I don't know now, I haven't played, and have no real intention to short term.

[Khobai]

Yeah an Atlas should not die that fast. Atlases should be able to tank a whole lot more damage.

[Yokaiko]

Khobai, on 06 March 2013 - 02:13 PM, said:

Yeah an Atlas should not die that fast. Atlases should be able to tank a whole lot more damage.

Even at 1.0 per missile I drop 150 missiles on an atlas with 80 CT armor.....

[Team Leader]

Apply this and the old "relock after every shot" to streaks as well and you will have a much more balanced game.

[80sGlamRockSensation David Bowie]

Oh speaking of LRMs and Assault Mechs dying instantly...



Not that this video is proof one way or another, just for entertainment.

[Yokaiko]

mwhighlander, on 06 March 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

Oh speaking of LRMs and Assault Mechs dying instantly...



Not that this video is proof one way or another, just for entertainment.

Oh werd I remember that.

[Marithiel]

TheFlyingScotsman, on 06 March 2013 - 09:54 AM, said:

WHAT I FEEL THE PROBLEM IS
LRMs are currently able to lock, track and land regardless of LOS if an ally is there to target your LRM target for you.

WHAT I FEEL WOULD IMPROVE LRMs
Forcing LRM users to maintain LOS, OR use a TAG/NARC (Either on the LRM boat or on the assisting ally) in order to have LRMs track and follow a moving target.

WHAT I DO NOT WANT
I don't want the damage, hit rate, ammo size or range of LRMs to be changed.

WHAT WOULD THAT DO?
It would make scouts or support who equip TAGS or NARCS more useful, and make those Equips more useful. This improves the strategic gaming experience for EVERYONE.

Yes! This is how LRMS should work. I enjoy LRM boating so it's not at hate thing. NARC time should be extended to make it a little more useful.

[Jonathan E]

Davers, on 06 March 2013 - 01:28 PM, said:

You can still do this in MWO. Use cover and advance. Just because you are piloting a mech doesn't mean you can't use the same tactics that worked in other games.

I disagree. The game modes used now (assault/conquest) there is no respawn and therefore you cannot learn from your mistake and seek out the sniper in his favorite perch. PGI had mentioned a 'Drop Ship' mode where you would respawn... but they have not put it in the game, like many many features they had discussed.

Also I have found that - unless your mech speed is so high you can disappear after flanking an enemy - flanking a group of battlemechs while solo is basically suicide. Let's be honest, leaving the main group for any reason is kind of a questionable move. Thanks to the increase in armor, even with a good alpha, it can be difficult to one-shot a mech in the back. Usually needs a splat cat unless you are up against a light, and they are moving so much that they are not the LRM boats that you're trying to flank.

No what usually happens is you take a long time being very clever and taking a lot of risks to carefully flank the enemy, deliver a volley into the back of some anti-fun LRM build, and then have a herd of stalkers turn around simultaneously (remember they are on TS that's why they are successful LRM boats) and thank the MWO gods that some ***** has delivered themselves solo into their midst. Then your pilot doesn't remember anything after that because your mech has been reduced to a fine red mist.

To get back to the point I made earlier is that LRM boating is not fun for the people being shot but it is not particularly fun for the people DOING THE SHOOTING either. I have tried LRM builds and well they're just really boring for me. I achieve a lock and fire a bunch of missiles and they hit or they miss. When they hit, all I see is health going down - say from 84% to 76%. Or say they run out of health and they explode, but I don't see it. What am I going to do? Give a sigh of relief I narrowly overcame my enemy as my heart races? Type for all to see I CAME I SAW I CONQUERED?

No, firing LRMS is boring, being hit by LRMS is boring (and annoying), and those are things that should not be in games. MHO.

[Khobai]

Quote

I don't want the damage, hit rate, ammo size or range of LRMs to be changed.

The damage/spread does need to be changed. Right now its possible to design an LRM boat that can one-shot or two-shot any other mech in the game. Artemis puts all those missiles in an Atlas' center torso. It is completely unbalanced.

LRMs/Streaks/ECM need a complete overhaul.

Edited by Khobai, 06 March 2013 - 02:38 PM.

[Lyrik]

Instead of nerving LRM's.

How about buffing AMS based on chassis? More tonnage means better AMS because of ........ (insert Technoblubbe)

Because LRM's are not a problem for my Jenner, Hunch and Cat. But Cataphracts, Atlas and Stalkers are only a bump in the road for serioux LRM boats. Something like the recent buffs/nerfs for the Cicada, Cent and Awesome.


Edit:
IF the spread is to narrow because of a bug or bad testing than of course this should be reversed first ;-)

Edited by Lyrik, 06 March 2013 - 02:39 PM.

[Praehotec8]

Jonathan E, on 06 March 2013 - 02:33 PM, said:

To get back to the point I made earlier is that LRM boating is not fun for the people being shot but it is not particularly fun for the people DOING THE SHOOTING either. I have tried LRM builds and well they're just really boring for me. I achieve a lock and fire a bunch of missiles and they hit or they miss. When they hit, all I see is health going down - say from 84% to 76%. Or say they run out of health and they explode, but I don't see it. What am I going to do? Give a sigh of relief I narrowly overcame my enemy as my heart races? Type for all to see I CAME I SAW I CONQUERED?

No, firing LRMS is boring, being hit by LRMS is boring (and annoying), and those are things that should not be in games. MHO.

Balance issues (or not) aside, your post is totally subjective. You're basically saying you don't like LRMs, so they shouldn't be in the game, or if they are, they ought to be useless. Many of us disagree, and enjoy using them.

They really aren't much different than any other weapon system in the game. You aim, you fire. Not much more/less skill than going brawling. Sure, lining up a shot is easier, but you also have to keep target lock longer the further they have to travel.

I don't particularly enjoy being shot by other mechs...maybe we can make the game so that only I get to shoot?

[Grizley]

thefinn, on 06 March 2013 - 01:37 PM, said:

You guys also forget to mention the lack of being able to fire indirectly behind cover.



Exactly.

I am honestly completely ******* shocked anyone has the GALL to bring this up as a reasonable topic.

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Are you referring to TT where you need a spotter that doesn't fire weapons to fire indirect, or are you claiming that MWO indirect fire isn't good enough?

I'm not buying ECM being OP as a reason that it's ok for LRMs to be OP in the absence of ECM. Bring them both into line.

[Moromillas]

It seems you want them to function the same way sniper weapons do. Why not just take sniper weapons if you think LRM's are not your thing.

[Grizley]

Something you guys that are claiming cover balances LRMs need to understand is that in TT there is no requirement to hide behind cover or instantly die to LRMs. Not being in cover means all weapons will hit you more often, but there is nothing special about LRMs. cER PPCs and Gauss rifles are by FAR more worrying than LRMs. As it should be, they are heavier systems that generate more heat, why on earth would they not be more dangerous?

I'm fine with LRMs flying faster to make it easier to land some missiles on target, but the spread needs to be considerably larger so that 14/20 missiles hit on average, not all 20 and certainly not all on the same panel or two. In TT LRMs are pretty good for crit seeking since you land missiles all over the place. They're good at wearing down a targets armor across the board so that direct fire weapons are more likely to penetrate. They're pretty poor at actually killing things, for the same reason that LBXs are poor at killing things. They spread the damage all over so that if a mech has 300 armor/structure you do about 250-300 damage to kill it and it doesn't start losing limbs until it's close to dead. By contrast, getting hit with a Gauss or cER PPC will take a very large percentage of the armor off a single location and leave that location vulnerable to destruction with a second or third hit to that spot. They destroy limbs, score kills with 50-60 damage done and are the best way to punch through armor.

In MWO missiles are like streaks with a 1km range, deal extra damage, have extremely tight grouping and make crossing any sort of open ground a very dumb idea.

Increase missile speed, knock damage down to 1/missile, increase spread. I would love to see the lockon system removed too, but the easymode 1km streak fans would cry rivers of tears fit to drown us all.

[Hedonism Robot]

My question is why does AMS suck so bad? If you are an atlas K and have 2 AMS systems ripping into the air I would expect to be able to move between 2 pieces of cover without getting melted by the missile boat stalker sitting across the river. The problem is the only real counter to LRMs in the game at the moment is the ECM. The ECM is only available on limited chassis and is out of balance itself.

PGI if you read this please consider the following:

• Buff AMS to actually protect against missiles, I don't care if it tears through ammo faster a real AMS is more effective on clumps of incoming missiles
  
• Buff BAP to always count as an ECM in counter mode.
  
• Make ECM more available for lights.

[Corwin Vickers]

Trauglodyte, on 06 March 2013 - 01:38 PM, said:

Nobody is saying that missiles miss. What we're saying is that, in TT, when you hit with a salvo of missiles, not all of the missiles actually hit. You rolled to hit, check. THen you did a dice roll to see how many missiles actually landed. Then you did a dice roll for where each cluster landed. In MWO, when your missiles land, all of the missiles hit. There aren't a few that fly over your shoulder or under your arms. Hiding behind terrain doesn't count as a "miss" in what we're talking about.

Yes, if someone is standing still you can hit with all missiles. On the other hand if they are moving you can miss with all missiles. Artemis, Tag, LOS, close range, you can miss with all missiles.

People should be moving. I know if someone stops in front of me I aim my weapons at his cockpit. Probably the source of all the "people are hacking because I keep getting headshot" threads.
LRM 15 24 20,582 5,446 26.46% 02:02:03 8,872
26% hit rate
MEDIUM LASER 45 1,737 1,588 91.42% 03:56:09 5,052
91% hit rate
AC/20 1 3 3 100.00% 00:01:57 60
100% hit rate

You keep saying "TT, TT, TT!" but you keep ignoring that direct fire weapons are aim-able and not random in MWO. You can damn well be sure that those 91% hit rate medium lasers were being aimed by me at some low armor or vital location.

Armor is also doubled in MWO. You aren't taking into account the effect of double armor on aim-able direct fire weapons vs spread damage weapons.

So since you are quoting the TT rules shouldn't the hit rate of missiles be the same as direct fire weapons in the same range bracket? Do you really want to up LRM hits to 91%? Sure, you can make it so only 14/20 missiles hit but I'm sure people would complain a lot more.


About 90 degree turns. I have seen missiles make 90 degree turns since the patch but it's always when you recently get TAG lock when the missiles are near the target. So it's not the LRMs but the way TAG is implemented. Isn't that what TAG is supposed to do though?

About headshots with LRMs. Who says LRMs can't get head kills? It is unlikely that every single missile you fired only hit their head. It's a matter of luck, partial cover, the placement and size of the mechs head. The same factors that would affect any other weapon except that you can aim the other weapons to specifically target the head.


Out of 15 mechs I only have 1 LRM Stalker. Personally I find it easier to do high damage in a match with a brawler or even a direct fire sniper than LRMs right now but I wanted to see what the new artemis is doing.

[Corbon Zackery]

The Arch of the launch and the new clustering of the missile using Arty is the issue right now people are launching at close to 75 degree angle so there being lobbed over terrain that's over 400m high without line of sight. The other thing is if you do arty a mech you need a computer for each launcher on that mech. There some huge LRM issues that got them nerfed early on when arty first came out that their adding back to the game under the excuse that ECM counter balances it. Yet not every match ELO sets up has ECM.

Edited by Corbon Zackery, 06 March 2013 - 03:20 PM.

[Corwin Vickers]

Grizley, on 06 March 2013 - 02:47 PM, said:

I'm not sure what you're getting at here. Are you referring to TT where you need a spotter that doesn't fire weapons to fire indirect, or are you claiming that MWO indirect fire isn't good enough?

He means that you can't shoot the other side of a mountain if you cannot see the other side of the mountain while you could in the TT. So you suspect that an enemy is hiding behind a hill, you just saw him go there, you should be able to somehow target the other side of the hill and fire, indirectly and without any kind of tracking. Right now LRMs target where your crosshairs are or through target lock but no untargetted indirect fire.

Hedonism Robot, on 06 March 2013 - 03:05 PM, said:

My question is why does AMS suck so bad? If you are an atlas K and have 2 AMS systems ripping into the air I would expect to be able to move between 2 pieces of cover without getting melted by the missile boat stalker sitting across the river.

And AMS rocks, especially dual AMS. I have seen it shoot every single missle coming at me out of the sky. It depends on how many missles get within that 200m radius at one time though. So if you're moving, you have some cover, some speed, and AMS you will never get hit by LRMs again, that's not counting ECM which is an "I win"

Now anyone who has played this game should know that you cannot walk in the open no matter what kind of weapons people are using against you without getting shot up. Just because you are in an Atlas doesn't mean you can be stupid. You can't figure out how to counter something that takes 10 seconds to get to you there is no hope.

[Jonathan E]

Praehotec8, on 06 March 2013 - 02:44 PM, said:

Balance issues (or not) aside, your post is totally subjective. You're basically saying you don't like LRMs, so they shouldn't be in the game, or if they are, they ought to be useless. Many of us disagree, and enjoy using them.

They really aren't much different than any other weapon system in the game. You aim, you fire. Not much more/less skill than going brawling. Sure, lining up a shot is easier, but you also have to keep target lock longer the further they have to travel.

I don't particularly enjoy being shot by other mechs...maybe we can make the game so that only I get to shoot?

I see your point but I still feel I am right. I'm being subjective? Not sure that people really understand what they mean when they use that word. Like it's a pejorative or something. - OMG that is so SUBJECTIVE. Of course I'm being subjective - I'm talking about whether LRM warfare is fun and well, fun is subjective. It is also important to every player so we may just have to (horror) discuss the subjective.

Ok so you like firing LRMS. But there are enough people commenting on this thread suggesting changes to LRMS that I think we both know that a lot of people are unhappy with it.

For me, it is like playing a game of Battleship, the Milton Bradley one. There is a screen that divides two people so that they cannot see each other's pieces. To hit the other's ships you use luck and intuition. I think MWO should be about eating lasers and watching ammo explode, not landing a bunch of guided missiles onto a pixel on the other end of the map. Which do you think SOUNDS more fun to MOST people?

As for "I don't particularly enjoy being shot by other mechs...maybe we can make the game so that only I get to shoot?" please leave the straw man behind. Classic internet. Take elements of someone's position, craft it into an indefensible, ridiculous argument, and then shove it into your opponent's mouth. Crude but effective.

What would I do to LRMS different than now? I might make them an effective direct-fire weapon. That's what they were in tabletop, but I don't know maybe PGI tried that in alpha and it didn't work. Slower ballistic style weapons (autocannon, PPC) can be difficult to land hits with so maybe they already went down that road and it didn't pan out.

It looks like airstrikes and artillery are going to be in the game, so that would take care of the indirect fire part of combined arms warfare that PGI is trying to achieve. I'm sure LRMS have their place but I think their implementation could be better. DON'T PANIC THE GOVERNMENT IS NOT COMING FOR YOUR LRMS Praehotec8. We are just trying to vent and discuss what could be improved.