507 replies to this topic

[Chameleon Silk]

if you have played a match against a team that is actually boating LRMs you'd realize that with target decay, tag and artemis escape is not an option, they out right said that splash is borked and you still have people comming on and saying LRMs are ok like this, to me these people are worse then anyone who claims something is OP cause they have absolutley no understanding of the game whatsoever, i hated pop tarters (i dont even own a JJ capable mech), i think PPC changes are decent compromise but LRMs are off the meter with OPness atm, even the devs are admitting that its splash is messed up. fix the splash, fix the spread, nerf the target decay, artemis and tag bonuses and we'd have a solid meta game finally after so many missed oppurtunities to have it right to begin with.... and FFS look at the ER large laser already will you that things a POS and people who use it right now make me facepalm.

[badkilik]

Kilo 40, on 21 May 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

the amount of entitlement oozing out of this thread is simply amazing.

But the numbers of people who don't seem to understand that this game is beta, and WE are the testers, is even more amazing.

and on a side note, the people who say "nameofweapon warrior online", you guys are just...pathetic.

the amount of entitlement oozing out of this thread is simply amazing.

But the numbers of people who don't seem to understand that this game is beta, and WE are the testers, is even more amazing.

and on a side note, the people who say "nameofweapon warrior online", you guys are just...pathetic.

Open Beta is practically a release especially if people are pay for ****. I feel sorry for the poor fellas who bought skins for their Blackjack's today. Giant ads for new cool stuff to sell but they cant seem to fix a game in their allotted time. Issues like this wouldn't be as much of a problem if the devs themselves actually played the game more often to experience these issues. I probably played 30 hours within the past week and I have yet to see 1 dev play. That basically shows me that they're just listening to suggestions on the forums and not actually taking time to try and make sense of anything that actually happens in the game. You sir are pathetic.

Edited by badkilik, 21 May 2013 - 10:23 PM.

[MustrumRidcully]

deforce, on 21 May 2013 - 03:12 PM, said:

wait, i remember this happening before. this is the what, 4th time now?

Getting missiles right seems difficult, and their QA methods seem inadequate in fixing such issues.

[MonkeyCheese]

Well done breaking the game again, I prefer fighting the ppc warrior online game....

[danust]

I never quit using LRMs and never thought they were ever truly broken in a direct fire role anyway. Used BAP with them too when wt available.

LRM 10 : Hits=9,473 Damage=9,407 Never did boat the lurms though.

I have noticed the flight path fast drop issue even today post patch. The ones I shoot and the one I receive. Standing by the drop ship blast shield in river city today and about half of a LRM 20 launch got through over the top. Wut wut? Launcher was 400m away across the river between me and shield. They are less unbroken now.

Things progress. Looking good. Thanks pilot devs.

edit: LRM 5 used in tandem as a 10 : Hits:=3,460 Damage=3,563. < All of these with BAP & module. LRMs were already making a modest comeback in my ELO bracket before the patch. 300m direct fire has always been sweet.

Flight path is weird I do admit. I often wonder how many opinions are based on not using a weapon, for or against.

Edited by Leedair, 22 May 2013 - 01:59 PM.

[Chameleon Silk]

if they fixed the splash, fixed the spread to be wider to hit all around the mech, kept the arc the same, nerfed tag and target decay and artemis a bit the game would be fine, but splash is messed up, the flight path for indirect fire is borked, the spread is to tight (with splash messed up)

every match i been in has been dictated by LRM boats, at least PPCs you had to aim them a bit now its more about getting a buddy to lock something for you and click the mouse button.

[valkyrie]

Kilo 40, on 21 May 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

the amount of entitlement oozing out of this thread is simply amazing.

But the numbers of people who don't seem to understand that this game is beta, and WE are the testers, is even more amazing.

and on a side note, the people who say "nameofweapon warrior online", you guys are just...pathetic.

You'd have a slightly more valid point if it was treated like a beta with rapid updates. Instead, PGI screws the pooch, they figure out the problem in a day or two, and then we're told "sorry, gonna be like that for a month or so. What do you mean people are quitting because they don't wanna wait that long?"

When other F2P devs are pushing out patches weekly or even more often than that, and we're stuck idling with issues the devs are fully aware of for 2 weeks at a time or MORE, there's a problem.

[Chameleon Silk]

if they dont fix the known issues in a hotfix in a few days I doubt I'll be playing much untill the june patching, with ppc warrior i still played.

[Ewigan]

I am looking forward to taking all my LRM mechs (what are quite a few) for a ride this evening

[MisterPlanetarian]

LRM flightpaths are a little extreme when behind cover, but no major issues. Splash damage seems to core CT's way to quicly though.

[Deathlike]

MustrumRidcully, on 21 May 2013 - 10:26 PM, said:

Getting missiles right seems difficult, and their QA methods seem inadequate in fixing such issues.

Being paid to screw up? I thought that was management's job!

[Name140704]

Chameleon Silk, on 21 May 2013 - 10:22 PM, said:

if you have played a match against a team that is actually boating LRMs you'd realize that with target decay, tag and artemis escape is not an option, they out right said that splash is borked and you still have people comming on and saying LRMs are ok like this, to me these people are worse then anyone who claims something is OP cause they have absolutley no understanding of the game whatsoever, i hated pop tarters (i dont even own a JJ capable mech), i think PPC changes are decent compromise but LRMs are off the meter with OPness atm, even the devs are admitting that its splash is messed up. fix the splash, fix the spread, nerf the target decay, artemis and tag bonuses and we'd have a solid meta game finally after so many missed oppurtunities to have it right to begin with.... and FFS look at the ER large laser already will you that things a POS and people who use it right now make me facepalm.

I use Advanced Target Decay, normal target decay is for noobs.

[RapierE01]

i tihnk they should have only adjust LRM Damage speed was okay after last patch.

[Chameleon Silk]

by target decay i meant the advanced one as well.....

[Billygoat]

I appreciate the CC post put... you know what you don't do when you have enough notice that your patch is screwed up that you can have a post, complete with graphics, ready to go beforehand to address the complaints? When you know far enough in advance that the patch will be broken enough that there will be complaints to address? You know the precise thing that you do not do? You. Do. Not. Push. That. Patch. To. Production.

This kind of thing keeps happening guys and, (lol) "Open Beta" or no, it makes you look like rank amateurs.

[Greeneye]

...wrong quote....

Edited by Greeneye, 21 May 2013 - 11:08 PM.

[Jeremy Wade]

Question:

How much extra spalsh damage is being applied to the CT that should be going to other areas on the mech? Is it more or less than the amount of damage done by a single salvo of LRMs from your average LRM boat (say 40-60 missiles).

If fixing the splash damage means that an LRM boat is only going to need to target you for an additional volley to get the kill, then you aren't suddenly going to be going back to last week when all we needed to survive an LRM shower was a sturdy umbrella.

Also the angle of attack fix is only being applied toindirect fire, when you target an enemy being targetted by an ally, that you have no direct line of sight to. The proposed fix notes don't say anything about what happens if you are targetted by an LRM mech and they hit you due to target decay after you move. If the LRM mech gets a LOS lock, tags you, has target decay modules equipped, then presumably the missile trajectory isn't going to change to an indirect trajectory dive just because you moved 10m to the left or right back behind whatever cover you were peeping out from.

[Jonathan Paine]

At least it's a change of pace from the pop tarts. But yeah, lrms are too powerful now. Will enjoy that until they hot fix them :-)

[Cole Allard]

Dunno guys,

LRM's have allways been a part of Battletech and Mechwarrior. Whats your problem?

Since yesterday's patch we see LRM throwers again, didnt you notice that we didnt see any before? Maybe 1 every 2 matches or so.

Now you have like 1 or 2 per match, thats a fair trade. Of course, you dont take yesterday, the patchday, for example. Everybody tryed them out yesterday.

[deadlykleenex]

First, weapons that don't require aim should never be "competitively viable" from a damage and hit standpoint. Second, I am struggling to determine the rational for addressing this in the first place. It's a no-win, no-value add design pursuit that contravenes the vision. The basic tension between the two extremes here is a single weapon system that is not competitively viable vs the play value for the vast majority of your player base, especially non-ECM light and medium mechs.

This is a no brainer. You might tweak the balance, but LRMs can never become "competitively viable" or it will be an expense of so much play value for so many players. I understand software design and development, so I'm pretty forgiving especially on things like patch execution. But I think this LRM balance attempt is too incredibly myopic to bite my tongue.

Edited by deadlykleenex, 21 May 2013 - 11:39 PM.