Jump to content

Should Lrms Target Mechs Differently?


6 replies to this topic

Poll: Should LRMs target Mechs differently? (15 member(s) have cast votes)

Should LRMs target Mechs differently?

  1. Yes, LRMs should target different locations and get an accuracy boost. (2 votes [10.53%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 10.53%

  2. Yes, LRMs should target different locations but keep the current accuracy. (9 votes [47.37%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 47.37%

  3. No, LRMs should target CTs but get an accuracy boost. (1 votes [5.26%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 5.26%

  4. No, LRMs are fine the way they are. (3 votes [15.79%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 15.79%

  5. Other(Please explain) (4 votes [21.05%] - View)

    Percentage of vote: 21.05%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#1 Mechafruit

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 28 posts
  • LocationIllinois, United States

Posted 07 April 2013 - 08:01 PM

Ever notice how LRMs only target the CT of Mechs? Isn't the idea of LRMs supposed to be spreading damage rather than trying to core the Mech immediately? Take SSRMs for example, yes they do hit the CT more often than not, but some missiles target the side torsos. Wouldn't it be better for LRMs to also target the side torsos, and maybe even the arms and legs as well to get a better, spread damage effect than what we have now with splash damage? To possibly make up for the spread location targeting, missiles could perhaps be more 'accurate' and hit those locations more reliably.

Seeing an ALRM-20 volley hit a Mech in the open head on, and have 10-15 missiles hit the CT area, and the other 5-10 slam into the ground behind the Mech just seems a little awkward. What is your opinion on the matter? Should LRMs get an accuracy boost, but spread their damage by targeting other locations? Or should they stay how they are?

Edited by ZMarine123, 08 April 2013 - 07:51 AM.


#2 Deathlike

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Littlest Helper
  • Littlest Helper
  • 29,240 posts
  • Location#NOToTaterBalance #BadBalanceOverlordIsBad

Posted 07 April 2013 - 11:13 PM

LRMs was always meant to be a spread damage type of weapon.. not a "missile" that does direct damage to the CT (I'm pretty sure it is covered by a different name altogether). IF AND ONLY IF the target was standing there w/o AMS is when missiles should be generously hitting the CT... which has not been the case. It hits the CT once it reaches the mech... which should never be the case 100% of the time.

Edited by Deathlike, 07 April 2013 - 11:13 PM.


#3 Wildstreak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 5,154 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 06:54 AM

I think your poll is done wrong, right now people can check multiple options.

LRMs need all at once:
- To stop being Streak LRMs. Under optimal conditions, not all LRMs should hit. These are not Smart Bombs.
- Keep Lock-on, the only way to make LRMs aimed weapons is to have straight flights like SRMs. Given how SRMs can be avoided in close range, imagine LRMs at long range using the same system.
- Damage buff but not near original or buffed levels. Say half to original for starters then tweak from there.
- Possibly give NARC a guided missile treatment, this would count as part of a Damage Buff and is all NARC needs.
- To stop being boated as the only weapon on any Mech.
- Might have been 1 or 2 other things I cannot remember at this moment.

LRM Pilots need:
- To watch paper dolls for damage when a flight should hit, then they know if they should fire again or stop because they hit terrain. The amount of times I keep seeing people fire at the same target only to hit terrain, 'shakes head.' Yes, I know some people use them for Psych Ops but not all do.
- Learn the best range is between 180m - 270m in my view. Fits with the max range of some other weapons.
- If you want to be the best LRM pilot, try to use NARC up to its max range of 270m. I figure if you can use NARC up to its max range, you deserve to be considered a top tier LRM Shooter.
- To learn what the definition of a LRM boat is.

#4 Krzysztof z Bagien

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Giant Helper
  • 710 posts
  • LocationUć, Poland

Posted 08 April 2013 - 07:19 AM

View PostMerchant, on 08 April 2013 - 06:54 AM, said:

I think your poll is done wrong, right now people can check multiple options.

That's exactly what I did, just because I could :)

#5 Mechafruit

    Member

  • PipPip
  • The Mercenary
  • The Mercenary
  • 28 posts
  • LocationIllinois, United States

Posted 08 April 2013 - 07:58 AM

Whoops... fixed the poll. Those are good points you brought up Merchant, I agree with all of them, however LRMs actually miss a lot of missiles already. At the moment, a large majority of LRMs from a volley(~25-35%) will miss even a stationary Mech.

#6 Wildstreak

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Civil Servant
  • Civil Servant
  • 5,154 posts

Posted 08 April 2013 - 07:56 PM

View PostZMarine123, on 08 April 2013 - 07:58 AM, said:

Whoops... fixed the poll. Those are good points you brought up Merchant, I agree with all of them, however LRMs actually miss a lot of missiles already. At the moment, a large majority of LRMs from a volley(~25-35%) will miss even a stationary Mech.

Thanks for confirming that, been wondering about it for a bit.
Strange, it should be more random that a fixed percentage range so that can be counted as part of what's wrong with them.

#7 Dimitry Matveyev

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 122 posts
  • LocationLatvia

Posted 09 April 2013 - 01:57 PM

Other.
I think LRMs should target not a mech itself, but an area where it is standing, or where it'll be if going or running. Than missiles will definetely hit random mech parts. Without Art this area could be bigger, with Art smaller and calculation of area more precise.
And some other LRM tweaks - damage bigger, flight speed higher and firing not all at once, but 1 by 1 (5 missiles in a sec would do nice ROF, I think).





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users