28 replies to this topic

[Asmudius Heng]

Let's stop talking about exact damage.

Let;s talk about the behviour or the weapons and thier role on the battlefield as individual supplement weaopns and as main boated weapons.

All the variables and emchanics of a weapon determine if it works in that role not just damage.

Right now we have such a narrow view of what to change because PGI is quite set on thier mechanics and do not seem to realise that as the game and all system evolve the weaopns start being destroyed in thier niches and roles and need to be redefined.

IMO LRMs need an indirect and direct fire mode so the issue of people hiding behind hills lobbing missiles is solved which making a direct fire mode with increased accuracy (with the downside that you need to expose yourself to enemy fire) more devestating.

Once the idea of how its suppose to work is implemented to fill the roles needed then lets talk exact damage.

[Yokaiko]

DerSpecht, on 11 April 2013 - 12:22 AM, said:

What is this thread good for when PGI states that the LRM nerf is temporary?

So was removing knockdowns. 6 months and counting ago.

[J0anna]

The biggest problem I see is that PGI didn't implement all the TT rules. Missiles should do less damage when you are standing in city/rough or wooded terrain - they don't. Also PGI doubled everyone's armor, thus throwing Battletech's balance right out the window. While I too don't want to play "missile warrior online", their damage atm leaves a lot to be desired.

Nonetheless, PGI knows missiles are underpowered, so expect some buffs over the next month or so.

[Evil Ed]

Asmudius Heng, on 11 April 2013 - 04:48 AM, said:

IMO LRMs need an indirect and direct fire mode so the issue of people hiding behind hills lobbing missiles is solved which making a direct fire mode with increased accuracy (with the downside that you need to expose yourself to enemy fire) more devestating.

We already have that, twice actually. They are called Artemis and TAG.

[MustrumRidcully]

Team Leader, on 10 April 2013 - 02:13 PM, said:

Or how about no splash damage at all? Why do we even need it? It's not fair to do extra damage. However I agree with the damages. If they just did their SET damage wherever they hit, and only where they hit, we wouldn't have a problem.

Currently they need it because all missiles go for the center torso (well, all homing missiles do), and they have yet to fix that.

Otherwise I agree, missiles don't need splash damage.

Splash damage might be a better to way to implement the LB10 X-AC, however. The pellets turn into a mere animation detail, and the projectile has a splash radius and spreads the damage.

[Zyllos]

All locking missiles need to randomly pick a location they are aiming for on the mech and attempt to home in on that section. So H, CT, RT, LT, RA, LA, RL, and LL. Just make it a percentage, like 18% CT, 14% RT, 14% LT, 12% RA, 12% LA, 12% RL, 12% LL, 6% H. Then, once missiles are flying to their respective location, just make them fly like they do now.

Then, they need to up the LRM damage to like 1.0, remove splash damage, and increase speed by 100% (to 200m/s, 2/3 the speed of a SRM). SRM damage should be upped to 2.0 and removed splash damage.

MustrumRidcully, on 11 April 2013 - 05:05 AM, said:

Splash damage might be a better to way to implement the LB10 X-AC, however. The pellets turn into a mere animation detail, and the projectile has a splash radius and spreads the damage.

The LBX needs to be landing with 80% of the pellets against a medium sized target at optimal distance. That should make the weapon mostly hit a single section at 50% optimal distance, but not 100% of all pellets hitting the aimed section.

This will allow for more "critical hit" rolls to happen, thus making the weapon better for seeking criticals.

Edited by Zyllos, 11 April 2013 - 06:12 AM.

[Roland]

I think the LRM damage is actually in a pretty good place right now.

The change I would make is to make it go back to the old system, where they held lock even if the shooter lost lock on them. This would make them less frustrating to use, and require less ammo being wasted on shots.

Since they've reduced the damage, and changed the flight arc, I suspect that this one change would improve missiles just enough to make them more widely used, but not crazy op (since you'd still be able to get cover from them).

[VoltarDark]

Thanks you for all your comments ! We will see what PGI do.

[Znail]

If they changed it so that each missile only damaged on location, then we could use the TT damage values without issues. The problem is that right now so do the missiles behave unpredictable and is thus hard to balance.