57 replies to this topic

[hashinshin]

If you didn't want people to boat LRMs you shouldn't have added so many LRM boating mechanics.

You use artemis which uses tonnage to make LRMs stronger, so if you just added tonnage making them stronger... why not use more? You use TAG which uses tonnage to make LRMS stronger... If I have all this LRM ammo, why not find a way to shoot it faster?

or as I like to call it

If you try to balance an FPS off a 30 year old tabletop that really didn't care about balance you're going to have a bad time. (Especially when that 30 year old tabletop based what little balance it had primarily off of a point system you're ignoring.)

At some point it's just common sense. If you added a module that for 2 tons increased all laser damage by 20% why WOULDN'T you expect laser boats to become a thing?

[Joseph Mallan]

1.5 Million C-bills makes a laser boat more viable. On TT 2-3 at most 4 LRM were needed to make a Mech fearsome. Double armor, and generous HPs makes the MMO almost balanced with TT.

[hashinshin]

Joseph Mallan, on 13 March 2013 - 04:25 AM, said:

1.5 Million C-bills makes a laser boat more viable. On TT 2-3 at most 4 LRM were needed to make a Mech fearsome. Double armor, and generous HPs makes the MMO almost balanced with TT.

On the TT weapons were just ranges, heats, and damage. Nothing else. Some weapons had special rules.

In MWO weapons are range, heat, damage, whether it's a DoT or instant damage effect, travel time, lock on, cover, and whether or not the player can themselves hit it rather than a dice roll. Why? Because it makes the game more diverse and less "this weapon is that weapon with more stats on it."

The difference between LRMs on TT and MWO is basically that they are not the same weapon. LRMs would have to do 1.0 damage and move at the speed of of a PPC and then they might be more like the TT.

[Joseph Mallan]

Yawn. missiles are fine, it takes a lot of rain to make them worth having and it is the combined fire of three LRMboats that ruin my Day.

[Critical Fumble]

hashinshin, on 13 March 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

The difference between LRMs on TT and MWO is basically that they are not the same weapon. LRMs would have to do 1.0 damage and move at the speed of of a PPC and then they might be more like the TT.

I'd like that, actually.

[Revorn]

1.0 dmg? Seriously?

Rofl, you may had yourself better informed about Patchhistory of LRMS. At 1.7 pre ECM no one, even the last Player, didnt ctook care about LRMs, because the didnt do any counting dmg.

[Faldrin]

Well tbh if they moved at the same speed as a ppc I would rock LRM's still to the point of boating^^ even if they reduced the damage to 1.0. Truth is 2 LRM 15 with arti are fine its when you get 3-4 LRM 15 that they start to get "OP" then when you have 3 or 4 players all firing 2 or more lrm 15 at the same target it "looks" op but truth is its not. Same can be said about my jenner with 6 ML. 30 pinpoint damage.. and yes its pretty much pinpoint damage feels OP at times.

I have no problem with LRM's as they are now. Just some players like to stand in the open.

[Zakie Chan]

New artemis pattern sure has made lrms more savage than they've been in a long time. Now that the ECM new car smell has faded and players have realized that tag lets you Lurm stuff, There is a huge increase in lrm mechs.

I seldom post seriously in balance/qq threads but really, it seems that Lrms have gone past the point of having teeth to having fangs. I know the boating aspect of things is the true evil but currently it doesn't take many launchers to steamroll enemy mechs.

I dont want Lrms to be useless, I understand their role and purpose. However with 40 lrms doing 72 dmg and artemis tightening the cone to land relatively all in one spot sure makes 80 lrms on the enemy team outrageous.

Have artemis radius increased slightly, but give the missles a noticeable speed boost over regular ones. This accomplishes the purpose of keeping mechs away from open spaces, while still landing for large damage values (just spread across target more). Lrms wont necessarily get all the kills but they will do most of the work. (Also think of adding lrm bonuses so less emphasis is on the kill and more on helping out).

Ideally a mech should get arm'd and leg'd before being cored by lrms, allowing the recipient to take a few hits but have their fighting ability severely reduced. To reward lrm players for their efforts, provide a range of incentives through cbill and xp rewards for damaging targets. Perhaps an increase for components destroyed by lrms or a fire support reward when lrms have contributed to a teammates kill.

[AC]

I just dislike how LRM's are the easy button. This is only because of the indirect fire mode they have combined with the free C3 network for everyone. If LRM's were LOS only, but were made even more effective when doing so, they would be a challengin and effective weapon.

[Xendojo]

AC, on 13 March 2013 - 05:54 AM, said:

I just dislike how LRM's are the easy button. This is only because of the indirect fire mode they have combined with the free C3 network for everyone. If LRM's were LOS only, but were made even more effective when doing so, they would be a challengin and effective weapon.

I agree the free C3 network needs to go.

But LRMs OP??? No way. AMS, ECM, and most importantly COVER!!! And if you really have doubt's the stats make it clear. LRMs have the worst stats out of any weapon i use, and it's the same for most players. Now if you happen to catch a full salvo...well that's YOUR fault, not the game's.

Dying on open ground to multiple LRM boats? OP.

[Lyrik]

AC, on 13 March 2013 - 05:54 AM, said:

I just dislike how LRM's are the easy button. This is only because of the indirect fire mode they have combined with the free C3 network for everyone. If LRM's were LOS only, but were made even more effective when doing so, they would be a challengin and effective weapon.

Indirect fire is only an easy button on idiots. Against every semi-intelligent/competent players it's a waste of rockets.

[AC]

Lyrik, on 13 March 2013 - 06:06 AM, said:

Indirect fire is only an easy button on idiots. Against every semi-intelligent/competent players it's a waste of rockets.

The noobs out number the competent players here....

[Tabrias07]

LRMs should do 1 dmg.

The new artemis spread doesn't actually make them kills things faster (test it yourself in testing grounds), it's basically a cosmetic effect.

[Calem]

God. Another of those threads. Three active threads. And another one where people post blatantly wrong things and ignore facts, ignore math. I shouldn’t bother, really. I should know better. I should assume the best. I should assume people are just new. Unexperienced. I should assume they’re not either dumb or openly lying despite knowing better. I should walk away from this thread.

I rolled a 20.

[Zen Hachetaki]

AC, on 13 March 2013 - 06:12 AM, said:

The noobs out number the competent players here....

All of us start out as noobs - the only way to become competent is through experience and most folks after getting LRM'd to death will come look up how to deal with it. Every weapon has a place and LRMs can be effective against seasoned players simply by being a supressing fire weapon which forces them to keep their heads down while your team maneuvers to flank etc. Overall the balance is coming but as pointed out elsewhere - the game has never been completely about weapon balance # Clan tech, as noted on the original box set, a game of armored tactics. Superior tactics always wins against superior weapons.

The fun part of this sometimes for me is taking "cr@ppy" mechs (esp stock configs) and trying to make them useful. I do not enjoy cheese builds just so I can stroke my ego on damage done/kills. Similar argument against folks who want to pick their mech after knowing the map. Kinda the point to me has always been, " Well this is what I have got - how do I make it fit the situation?". In life you can rarely optimize every element, being able to adapt is what makes people successful; leverage your strengths in any situation, and mitigate your weaknesses...

Apologies for wandering off topic...

[MustrumRidcully]

Revorn, on 13 March 2013 - 04:48 AM, said:

1.0 dmg? Seriously?

Rofl, you may had yourself better informed about Patchhistory of LRMS. At 1.7 pre ECM no one, even the last Player, didnt ctook care about LRMs, because the didnt do any counting dmg.

1.0 Damage with the projetiel speed of the PPC means - almost every missile will hit, no one wil outrun them or move into cover before the missiles hit. Trust me, t his would still be a very effective weapon.

[hashinshin]

you know my thread had 0 to do with balance.

I was just saying that since you can drop tonnage and crit space in to making LRMs better it just makes sense to boat more of them.

also I was speaking hypothetically with the LRM change. I was saying that IF you wanted them to be like the TT you would make them 1.0 damage and move at PPC speed.

[Lootee]

MWO's LRMs are just plain wrong. TT had better balance between LRMs and other weapons.

In TT:
1) LRMs were no easier to hit with at max range than an ERPPC. If it was a shot you would most likely blow with a PPC or gauss, you'd probably miss with a LRM20 too.

2) ERPPCs, gauss rifles, some clan lasers and small autocannons could hit a LRM boat from beyond its max range. At 631m+ LRMs could not even fire back.

3) Even if you scored a hit with a LRM20 you can fully expect 25-40% of the missiles to deal NO damage. Very seldom did every missile deal damage from a volley.

MWO's LRMs outrange every one of those weapons I mentioned above, are derp mode easy to aim, and absent cover or ECM every single missile will hit and deal damage.

Your first post blamed TT for being unbalanced when the reality is it's MWO's mechanics that made them overpowered. I agree the LRMs here have nothing in common with the TT version other than the name.

Many canon stock TT configs carried 2, 3 or even 4 LRM racks without breaking the game, because the TT version was far better balanced than the mess we have here.

I think the biggest issue with MWO's version is the extreme ease of aiming, and all missiles being guaranteed to hit. As I mentioned earlier even the slowest, fattest mech could expect 25-40% of the missiles from a successful strike to miss in TT. Here if you don't run at 140kph, don't have ECM or duck behind cover you will eat all 100% of the damage. Add Artemis and TAG and that 100% of damage will zero in on your CT.

Edited by PanchoTortilla, 13 March 2013 - 07:41 AM.

[0X2A]

Tabrias07, on 13 March 2013 - 06:17 AM, said:

LRMs should do 1 dmg.

The new artemis spread doesn't actually make them kills things faster (test it yourself in testing grounds), it's basically a cosmetic effect.

It gives them have a tighter grouping than non-Artemis users. Tighter groupings means increased lethality.

LRMs don't need an outright nerf, they need to be reworked. I'm taking about decreasing the damage and modifying flight speed and/or path. Imagine LRMs that would travel as fast as an Ac/20 (900m/s) (9x the current LRM speed a bit fast I know, but for an example), but only did 1 damage/missile. Highly usable when coupled with the new Artemis spread (90% of the volley would hit one component). OR 1 Dmg/Missile and a movement speed of 500m/s but had a higher arc? There are so many possibilities.

If they're considered by many to be OP in pug play while being near useless in comp play... Something is wrong balance wise.

Only thing I REALLY hate about LRMs is the cockpit shake :l Earthquake Sim 2013 anyone?

Edited by 0X2A, 13 March 2013 - 06:45 AM.

[Commander Kobold]

They should add in MRMs I would glaldy rip the LRM 20s of my catapult for a pair of MRM 40s

0X2A, on 13 March 2013 - 06:43 AM, said:

It gives them have a tighter grouping than non-Artemis users. Tighter groupings means increased lethality.

LRMs don't need an outright nerf, they need to be reworked. I'm taking about decreasing the damage and modifying flight speed and/or path. Imagine LRMs that would travel as fast as an Ac/20 (900m/s) (9x the current LRM speed a bit fast I know, but for an example), but only did 1 damage/missile. Highly usable when coupled with the new Artemis spread (90% of the volley would hit one component). OR 1 Dmg/Missile and a movement speed of 500m/s but had a higher arc? There are so many possibilities.

If they're considered by many to be OP in pug play while being near useless in comp play... Something is wrong balance wise.

Only thing I REALLY hate about LRMs is the cockpit shake :l Earthquake Sim 2013 anyone?

I don't find the cockpit shake on LRMs to be that bad, and the reason they're more effective in PuG play is because most PuG that I've seen don't seem to realise they have to keep moving a bit after they make the missle carrier lose their lock, while most team players know how to dodge missles (and almost always haven atleast 1 ecm carrier)