Ningyo, on 01 June 2013 - 07:46 PM, said:
why do people always compare them to PPC or such knownly overpowered weapons. Compare them to balanced weapons like AC5, AC20, LL, ML: Sure they still are a bit weaker and likely do need a small buff, but face it if PPC and ERPPC were 10 and 15 heat (TT values), or balanced in some other manner alot more variety of weapons could be used including LRMs.
PPCs are, actually, well where they should be.
The 'problem' is that the critical system of classic battletech, the heat system, and pinpoint strikes were never intended to work in a first-person setting. This is why games like MechWarrior 4, with its greater multiplayer focus, adopted the critical system that it did. It still allowed a wide array of customization - but it kept things relatively in check. Builds that could physically take 3+ PPCs were rather unique in their ability to do so. The Awesome and Sunder come to mind.
The PPC was relatively balanced in that you could hardly ever mount more than two - and even the 4x PPC builds were rather unwieldly because you were doing a lot of damage... but not -quite- enough to completely destroy responsibly built mechs.
The current PPC deals 10 heat. The ERPPC could, perhaps, stand to be brought up from 11 heat to 12 or 13 as a heavier penalty to the increased range and removal of minimum range - but that can be argued either way.
The point is that PPCs have always been fearsome weapons. Nerfing them makes builds like the K2 and Awesome largely underpowered compared to their ballistic and laser counterparts.
Steel Claws, on 01 June 2013 - 08:06 PM, said:
The real question I would ask most of you is what do you think would be a fair amount of damage from an LRM? Is 5 damage from an LRM 5 good? That’s less than it does now.
Learn to use math?
Each missile does less than one point of damage. That's less than five damage. Which means they are dealing less than a medium laser, require two (or more) tons plus ammo, have a flight-time, and give a launch warning. Oh, and a single LRM5 is pretty much useless against AMS. Back when teams carried AMS - a dual salvo of LRM15s would get cut down to spit-wads.
Quote
If you say yes then you would also think that 20 from an LRM 20 is also good - it is after all 4 x 5. Oh but wait - that means our original poster with his 4 LRM 20s will be doing 80 points of damage per salvo without ever having to see his opponent. You see the issue here. This is a very fine line to walk. Were you to make a 2 LRM 15 centurion very effective using LRMs alone - were does that leave a 4 LRM 15 Awesome?
1.3 damage per missile, at the least. Likely 1.5 to 1.6 will be where they should be (1.8, where they were before, would be a bit much with the current mechanics).
I'm not sure what game people are playing when they talk about LRMs. Sure - you -can- sit back and fire at red boxes, and do 'okay' during a game. If your team is pretty good.
That's 'strategic' play. You're helping to command territory and deny the enemy free movement. It is a critical function of all long range platforms. The LRM player, however, must be able to sort through the chaos, prioritize targets, and put damage where it is most needed. Rather than letting a duo of lights chew on a lone assault for 60 seconds - you can rain a few salvos in and get those lights out of there in 35 seconds so that they can get in the hair of some lights that are over-running your line.
You've got to know when to dumb-fire into a sniper nest to make him keep his head down (current LRMs are just too weak for him/her to care, really - most mechs will tank the shot, these days - even mediums that would bolt at the sight of a 40-missile swarm coming in their direction).
Then there's tactical play. That's when you are the tip of some spear or another. You push a wide flank or wade just behind the front line and hammer anything at just beyond the minimum range of your missiles. That element is completely gone, now. You can't put out enough damage in any relevant time-frame. 200 missiles slam into most of the torso of a highlander and he just smiles at you, and puts 3PPCs and a gauss into your CT and one of his team-mates cores you with the only large laser on his team.
It's a role that used to change the entire flow of battle - a C4 pulls off a flank and starts disintegrating a Cataphract or punishing the opposing Stalker boat in a sort of geurilla warfare that gave your main line the distraction and panic necessary to over-run and put its bralwers into action.
There were few roles more fun than playing tactical LRM support. It would have been absolutely enthralling if I'd had team-speak and our team had enough cohesion for them to stick a medium to me to help deal with the lone light mech that might decide to give me trouble if he caught me out and away from the team.
I took pride in downing the enemy's fire support 'boats' that thought they had an easy job.
Now, you're pretty much forced to sit behind cover. PPC boats everywhere - and you don't do damage for jack ****. My Jenner can down mechs faster than my C1 and C4 combined. It's not even an issue of "if you get caught in the open" - you can't protect your team like you used to. There's no gratification in dropping an AC-20 spammer as he tries to close on your team. You can't drop him before he's already torn through two of your team-mates - even if all of your salvos are hitting dead on.
It's completely demoralizing. Which is why I have been playing my Jenner almost exclusively since the LRM-nerf.... when I bother to play at all. With host-state rewind in effect - it's become even worse. Everything carries PPCs or a gauss rifle. Mediums have become much more rare... it used to be impressive to see 3 assaults in a team. It's run-of-the-mill, now.
Quote
People said PPCs were too weak and that they needed buffed - I said they were fine. They buffed them and look where we are today. Be very sure of what you ask for people because you probably won't like the result. I'd far rather error to the side of caution than start a whole new meta - or dig up an old one.
You see - the problem isn't necessarily the PPC, itself. The problem is that, until recently, sniping was wishful thinking. Even if you were lined up perfectly and made your shot on your screen - there was no guarantee that the server would agree with you. With some host-state-rewind in effect, it's made sniping much more realistic. Which is why we've seen a shift toward gauss rifles in ballistics and fewer Leroy Jenkins AC builds. PPCs have also taken the place of large lasers and even some builds that used to use medium lasers (since the damge-to-heat ratio is similar and the PPC deals all of its damage in one shot).
Part of the problem is with the way the hard point system works. Mechs have lost a lot of their personality because of this. The other main cause of the problem is just that people will do what is effective. Direct-fire has always been a powerful tool. Now that it works more correctly - people are going to flock to it.
Why indirect fire and missiles as a whole were completely neutered is beyond me. They went from being OP because of a bug to being completely useless unless your whole team happened to pack 20+ tubes and was focusing fire on the same target.
Quote
Again I would have to ask, just what are your expectations for this weapon? I see them used just fine in average quantities. In less than 20 or so - not so much but they still can serve a purpose, but when you can build a mech quite easily that can carry 80 with over 1000 reloads - do you really want 20 to be all that effective. Or if you’d rather – do you balance them for the guy putting an LRM 15 on his centurion or the guy putting 80 on his stalker. You have to balance them for the boater just like everyone wants to balance PPC based on boated use. They do damage and take off armor now, any more and they will be boated heavily again and that people isn’t very fun. I think they are closer to being spot on than many people think.
Why would they be boated heavily? Logic dictates that LOS is necessary to launch missiles - be it you (if you want Artemis buffs) or an ally. That means someone is exposed to those "horribly OP" direct fire weapons that now hit their target. Those weapons do point damage (rather than saturation) and can be fired on a moment's notice rather than needing time to lock on and fly to their target (not to mention a maintained cumulative LOS).
That, and the nerfs have made LRM-reliant designs (like the Catapult) completely ineffective. 8 tons of ammo... and you might be able to kill 3 enemy mechs on your own. Even Machine Guns have better max-damage-to-ammo-tonnage ratios.
Ghogiel, on 01 June 2013 - 11:21 PM, said:
I am fully aware it is an assault mech with an assault mech loadout. Top 3 in damage usually with kills is where you should be, you could replace the loadout with anything reasonable and I would expect similar results.
And, yet, those are not all that different from my results piloting a Jenner with 6 medium lasers.
I run more consistent games with a mech nearly 1/3 the tonnage, no ammo restrictions, and pinpoint damage. Which means I'm regularly scoring far more kills and component destructions.
2
.
.
