55 replies to this topic

[Jape]

What I would do to make LRMs better and more balanced is to double their travel speed and cooldown. This would make them more usable in competitive matches because they would hit more often due to higher speed while lowering the dps to give less experienced players more time to get to cover after being hit by them.

[Koshirou]

Nightcrept, on 15 March 2013 - 02:34 AM, said:

Most players do not agree that lrms are op currently.

Says who?

[Nightcrept]

The million polls we have conducted almost daily.

[StalaggtIKE]

Nightcrept, on 14 March 2013 - 03:14 PM, said:

I understand your point. And while I think your example would work some for the lower tiers and new players. It would only serve to exacerbate the problem with lrms for the better players and competitive groups.

That is the problem that interceptor mentioned.

Lrms are deadly to new and or stupid players. But for veteran and team play they are almost useless.

So how do you make them all around viable?
Remember the current implementation was a trial and error .1 adjustment per patch for months before ecm balance.
The only buffs since ecm has been the new swirly flight configuration.

I guess you are proposing no change at all. I'm only trying to come up with a solution, one without direct changes to LRM themselves. With changes inbound to ECM, I'm pretty sure LRM will see a change soon after. Better players hardly brought LRM to begin with, prior to ECM. So, I fail to see how less ammo would hurt them now. My proposed change would do nothing to LRM only cut back on the overall ammo count one brings into battle. Again I say, it's not the numbers, but the idea that should be considered. Do you feel it would be better at 170/ton?

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 15 March 2013 - 04:52 AM.

[Sheraf]

LRM is not dangerous to me even without ECM. I just see LRM exchange fight as initial part of the game before the close combat finishes what remains

[Koshirou]

Nightcrept, on 15 March 2013 - 03:33 AM, said:

The million polls we have conducted almost daily.

Where? I could only find two polls for the last week or so. One with ~70 participants, a binary "Overpowered yes/no" option and a ~60% majority in favor of the latter and one with ~300 participants, several options for reducing LRM damage or leaving it as it is, with only ~40% in favor of the latter.

Although the second one has more participants, both samples are small enough to have a considerable margin of error, in excess of 10% for the first poll. But they are not representative of the player base as a whole anyway because of obvious selection biases.

[Nightcrept]

There is one running currently with a hundred or so players.

But searching you can find a bunch.

Doesn't matter anymore though as on the 2nd they will become completely powerless.

[M4rtyr]

Nightcrept sited the usual, 'remember armor has been doubled' That is meaningless.

It was doubled to slow kill rates, so raising any weapon damage just negates that reason in the first place and when you only do it for missiles then it breaks weapon balance because they are now stronger then other weapons.

If long kill times really were hard on missiles then a fix for them would be increasing the ammo per ton so they can fire longer.

The double armor defense is complete garbage and to be honest it was moronic for the devs to have done it in the first place.

But then he also seems to beleive that splash damage is like half of what missiles do so when they remove it for 'tuning' missiles won't do jack. yeah whatever.

[Nightcrept]

M4rtyr, on 16 March 2013 - 06:33 PM, said:

Nightcrept sited the usual, 'remember armor has been doubled' That is meaningless.

It was doubled to slow kill rates, so raising any weapon damage just negates that reason in the first place and when you only do it for missiles then it breaks weapon balance because they are now stronger then other weapons.

If long kill times really were hard on missiles then a fix for them would be increasing the ammo per ton so they can fire longer.

The double armor defense is complete garbage and to be honest it was moronic for the devs to have done it in the first place.

But then he also seems to beleive that splash damage is like half of what missiles do so when they remove it for 'tuning' missiles won't do jack. yeah whatever.

OK genius.

Srm's do 12.7 i think they said per missile currently due to splash damage in game. And we see that they aren't extremely overpowered.

Removing splash damage drops then to their original 2.5 that is a decrease in game of 10.2 points of damage per missile or about 3/4ths of their damage.

So reducing them by 3/4ths won't make them useless. Yeah whatever learn math.

If Lrm's use splash damage as well then we should expect the same reduction or similar.
So get a clue.

[M4rtyr]

LMAO where are you getting this.. SRM's do NOT do 12.7 damage per missile and I know since the only weapons I use currently are MLs and SRMs.

SRM's do 2.5 damage per missile and a small amount of splash damage. As I stated in many other threads, right after this whole thing about the SRM damage, splash damage, and training ground damage issues came up I was playing on Alpine in my splatacat. I fired once and only once in that match (only saw one guy) fired a point blank alpha. Six SRM6's max damage is 90, I did 94 damage so even if you assume 1-2 missiles missed (but the animation looked like all hits) then you're looking at a range of 4-9 splash damage out of -36- missiles. So where is all this damage you are coming up with. The training grounds are broken Paul stated that very clearly so don't count on those. Live numbers are pretty normal.

All this said however, i still want missile damages lowered back to their bases, 2 for SRM and 1 for LRM.

[Nightcrept]

M4rtyr, on 16 March 2013 - 07:01 PM, said:

LMAO where are you getting this.. SRM's do NOT do 12.7 damage per missile and I know since the only weapons I use currently are MLs and SRMs.

All this said however, i still want missile damages lowered back to their bases, 2 for SRM and 1 for LRM.

From the srm splash damage thread.

And your definitely in the far far off minority on the 1.0 lrm thing. People had a ungodly fit when they got lowered to 1.6. I know I was one of them.

[M4rtyr]

Read the rest of that SRM thread.

You'll excuse me if I don't give you any credibility on the LRM damage however.

[Nightcrept]

M4rtyr, on 16 March 2013 - 07:12 PM, said:

Read the rest of that SRM thread.

You'll excuse me if I don't give you any credibility on the LRM damage however.

I won't excuse you. Your just being a **** on purpose. There hasn't been one poll or thread were the majority of people have though lrm's were op except for the artemis patch.

So your idea of nerfing them to 1.0 is insane. We worked very hard balancing the things in closed beta. Don't; you remember that?

We move the damage up and down and back up. We adjusted the flight characteristics in terms of everything from speed and spread to flight angles.

Where were you?

Edited by Nightcrept, 16 March 2013 - 07:17 PM.

[Nightcrept]

Here are the live number they came up with testing on the live servers.

http://mwomercs.com/...e-test-results/

And paul said the training gound numbers were almost doubled. So my estimates should be fairly close to realistic.

Edited by Nightcrept, 16 March 2013 - 07:25 PM.

[M4rtyr]

Not seeing it. I've faced off with many lights in my 4SP and my SRM's aren't obliterating them.

Either there is some flaw witht he testing or there is something specific that sparks it more in a testing envorornment more then actual combat, like center mass hits vs hits to the arms or legs. I just know the numbers I've gotten and my SRM's aren't insanely deadly. They are strong but not that strong.

The reason behind it the devs have gotten at is the size of the hit boxes, the smaller the more damage they take, like splash damage causes splash damage, so maybe it is only straight torso hits that really show this.

Edited by M4rtyr, 16 March 2013 - 07:35 PM.

[Nightcrept]

M4rtyr, on 16 March 2013 - 07:33 PM, said:

Not seeing it. I've faced off with many lights in my 4SP and my SRM's aren't obliterating them.

Either there is some flaw witht he testing or there is something specific that sparks it more in a testing envorornment more then actual combat, like center mass hits vs hits to the arms or legs. I just know the numbers I've gotten and my SRM's aren't insanely deadly. They are stong but not that strong.

That's my personal experience as well.

Which is why I was fighting so hard for the devs to play test solutions before removing splash damage in game and turning a possibly broken mechanic into a in game balance issue.

[CG Oglethorpe Kerensky]

Nightcrept, on 14 March 2013 - 05:02 AM, said:

Not another Lrm thread?!

This has been gone over so much it is bordering on the absurd.

Lrm's are only affective if you don't know how to play because you are new etc. Once you learn how to deal with them they are not even a nuisance. If your in the higher elo tiers you very rarely see Lrms and only if the user is extremely adept with them are they even remotely annoying.



Before ecm:

Lrm's went through a major balancing phase.
They started at 1.0 and went up to 1.9 and then back down and slowly raised incrementally to 1.8. During this time lrm flight characteristics were also buffed and nerfed nearly weekly. Especially after the GOD's rain artemis patch.
It was found that below 1.8 they didn't deal enough damage to be even slightly considered competitive.

(For you TT guys remember that mech armor values have been doubled so the lrms damage is actually .9)

What is this supposed to mean?
Of course armor values have been doubled, hence every weapon takes twice as many shots to get through a ton of armor...
Every weapon except LRMs.

Lets break it down.
LRMs got a slight buff and by slight I mean
+80% damage
+30% range
+80% ammo
Removed Miss Table (normally only 60% will hit)

I love how my AMS turns an incoming 80 missile volley from a Stalker and reduces it down a more manageable 75 missiles.

I can't wait until Clan LRMs arrive.

[M4rtyr]

Nightcrept, on 16 March 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

That's my personal experience as well.

Which is why I was fighting so hard for the devs to play test solutions before removing splash damage in game and turning a possibly broken mechanic into a in game balance issue.

Just to be clear though, I want LRM and SRM damage dropped back to the original 1/2 respectively. Especially since splash damage is planned to be additive, but maybe they will just fix bugs or maybe they will change how it works and not make it extra damage. But personaly, I don't want splash damage from missles, it makes no sense balance wise or flavor wise, now splash damage from ammo explosions would be fine. But if they keep it and its extra damage over missile base damage then that is two seperate damage increases for missile and no damage increases for other weapons. There is no balance in that at all.

Edited by M4rtyr, 16 March 2013 - 09:19 PM.

[Ralgas]

Nightcrept, on 16 March 2013 - 07:36 PM, said:

That's my personal experience as well.

Which is why I was fighting so hard for the devs to play test solutions before removing splash damage in game and turning a possibly broken mechanic into a in game balance issue.

Who said anything about flat out removing it ? (beyond the doomsayers that want this thing as basic as the 89' version)

Edited by Ralgas, 16 March 2013 - 09:21 PM.

[M4rtyr]

Ralgas, on 16 March 2013 - 09:20 PM, said:

Who said anything about flat out removing it ? (beyond the doomsayers that want this thing as basic as the 89' version)

Devs said they are taking splash damage out on the 2nd, to rework it, They intend to put it back in.