8 replies to this topic

[FerretWithASpork]

1 Ton gives you 180 shots.. If you have an LRM20 that's 9 loads. I'm not a Lore freak but according to the Battletech wiki LRM ammo is 6/tonne. Even if we give the benefit of the doubt and assume it's 6 shots not 6 missiles, MWO is 50% higher.

I propose dropping LRM ammo down to somewhere between 80 and 120/tonne. 120/tonne would be in line with the 6 shots from Battletech... however their missiles only did 1 damage each, whereas MWO missiles do 1.8.. an 80% increase. Dropping to only 80 Ammo/Tonne would even out this imbalance in damage.


It just doesn't make sense for LRM ammo/T to be higher than SRM ammo/tonne. Someone in the military correct me if I'm wrong but I'd think long range missiles would be significantly larger than short range missiles.. Therefore requiring more physical space, and in turn you would get less ammo/tonne.

Edit: I just want to note that I've never played battletech.. and I don't know how balanced it is.. so while I know I'm falling back on the "OMG USE CANON STATS" argument... From what I've seen in the game LRMs are unbalanced in their current state and considering that the stats are significantly higher than Battletech's I'm assuming they were pretty well balanced there.

Edited by FerretWithASpork, 12 March 2013 - 09:15 AM.

[Calem]

Unfortunately just another masked "LRMs are unbalanced" thread.

Gauss, AC/20 get more ammo, too, since we have double armour. So a game actually lasts 5 minutes.

Half on topic in reply to your "LRMs are unbalanced": The smarter/more experienced the player, the less effective LRMs are. In lower elo ranks they'll work well as people are learning piloting, maps, mechs, tactics. When you go up against coordinated people with several thousand matches under their belly, LRMS are useless. Some might not see this as their elo keeps them away from the upper ranks. In any case the competetive play footage on the forums (lotsa videos) speaks volumes about the non-overpoweredness of LRMs.

It's really just bad pilots.

Edited by Calem, 12 March 2013 - 09:34 AM.

[FerretWithASpork]

Calem, on 12 March 2013 - 09:33 AM, said:

In any case the competetive play footage on the forums (lotsa videos) speaks volumes about the non-overpoweredness of LRMs.

Ya don't say?

[Calem]

Did you actually watch that video? A bunch of Awesomes going 34.3 kph max, running 1080 LRM rounds each who were almost out of ammo halfways through the match. No backup weapons.

They won against a team which had 2 AFK people. If you think that's a demonstration of the OPness of LRMs I'm indeed done here. Same team would've been more effective boating ER PPC stalkers or Cataphract ballistic builds. Or poptarts. Almost anything really as long as you coordinate/focus fire.

[Vincent Lynch]

ALL ammunitions in the game were increased in ammo/ton. Why? Because armor was doubled, and you just NEED much more ammo to kill someone.
If ammo amounts had not been increased, everyone would only drive energy boats because it would be nigh impossible to haul enough ammo around to make more than one kill per game.
Also LRM have as many missiles per ton as SRM (close to) because LRM have smaller warheads. Also, LRMS arming only at 180m and not immediately allows dropping some safety gear SRMs incorporate, which also saves weight.

LRMs are unbalanced??? Did you ever see this sweet little acronym "ECM"??

[von Pilsner]

FerretWithASpork, on 12 March 2013 - 09:13 AM, said:

Edit: I just want to note that I've never played battletech.. and I don't know how balanced it is.. so while I know I'm falling back on the "OMG USE CANON STATS" argument... From what I've seen in the game LRMs are unbalanced in their current state and considering that the stats are significantly higher than Battletech's I'm assuming they were pretty well balanced there.

I agree they are unbalanced, they need to do a tad more damage (or splash, or go faster) or something to make them slightly better.

[LordBraxton]

von Pilsner, on 01 May 2013 - 01:22 PM, said:

I agree they are unbalanced, they need to do a tad more damage (or splash, or go faster) or something to make them slightly better.

you necro'd a thread about how Lurms are OP

to make a comment about how they are UP

[von Pilsner]

LordBraxton, on 01 May 2013 - 01:25 PM, said:

you necro'd a thread about how Lurms are OP

to make a comment about how they are UP

Hmmm, it was on the front page (or I'd have never seen it).

Edited by von Pilsner, 01 May 2013 - 01:27 PM.

[DubBucket]

Someone must have voted on this old thread. No one thinks LRMs are OP right now.

Edit - Speaking of, it'd be nice if we could vote/post on a thread and elect to NOT bump it to the top.

Edited by DubBucket, 01 May 2013 - 03:33 PM.