Roland, on 03 June 2013 - 01:14 PM, said:
Really, now.
Count with me:
http://www.youtube.c...oemOPUUQ#t=194s
One salvo.
Two salvo.
Three salvo plus buddy's salvo.
Four Salvo.
Five salvo.
Six salvo.
Most of those are on torso sections. That's at least 200 points of damage... which can't even exist on the whole torso of that mech - yet the dude has orange armor when he goes down.
Whiskey. Tango. Foxtrot.
Not to mention - he's being pumped full of direct fire by my team.
Just... uh... how many salvos should it take?
Ten? Twelve?
Fifteen?
Maybe we'll just make LRMs a visual effect. Real support comes from consumables.
Quote
*shrug*
I get along just fine stripping people in my Jenner. I have plans to play around with the BlackJack. I'd like to build a decent sniper with the Jeager - but that looks like it's over-played at the moment.
I think you need to drag that LRM build of yours out of the closet and give it a try with the current game mechanics.
It's very, very different from what it was back in January - even February.
Quote
And is he going to be alone?
Should I bring a Catapult in to help my team... or should I bring an AC40 jeager?
Which is going to be more helpful to the team under the current mechanics in practical engagements?
At this point in time - if the enemy has a Catapult while you brought the Jeager - assuming the skill levels of all pilots are equal (lol); you're looking at a roughly insurmountable statistical advantage in favor of the team with the Jeager. The range and even theoretical application of the Catapult don't stack up to reality. It doesn't matter how you reposition the team, how many times you run the engagement. The catapult can run off and die or it can rack up 800 points of damage. It will not be able to affect the result in anything approaching the way even a single centurion with an AC10 can.
Quote
So I point at the shoulder and click the button.
I do this in my sleep while fighting off caffeine withdrawl in my Jenner. It's arguably a bit more difficult with an autocannon - but let's be real.
It's a major feat of skill that the bullet goes exactly where my little dot on the screen is in a straight line. This is taxing and we must necessarily bring this fact up in a discussion about the legitimacy of weapon usage.
Since a missile is guided - it must not require any cranial overhead to operate - much unlike the laser, which requires one to comprehend in which direction the target is moving and ensure their little dot remains over the target.
Also, these people with direct fire weapons must expose themselves to fire. Since missiles can be fired indirectly, it is okay if they don't do jack diddly ****. It's not like the mech with LOS and taking direct fire was actually relying upon those missiles to help him engage an enemy. He is, after all, a skillful tactician - a master of putting 10 pixel circles over humanoid objects and clicking the button. This one, is, in fact, a genius - and realizes that if he hits the same place repeatedly with his two 20 damage dealing weapons that he will kill an enemy very quickly. He wouldn't possibly need any help.
Quote
I'm talking about factors affecting lock. Those two are not necessarily inclusive of each other (though they can be).
Quote
The thing is that I can't fire at targets without team LOS. That means someone is in harm's way.
You keep thinking about this in a "me" context. "What if I'm up against this thing?"
Remember - I'm arguing for the enemy to be able to field these against me and my team, as well.
For an LRM player to fire indirectly requires teamwork. Somoene has to have LOS - Someone has to be exposed to fire. They also have to be selecting a target that is valid for the support mech. They must hold that track for the flight time of the missiles - which can be in excess of 10 seconds (or about 2 full recycles of most weapons - including those like PPCs and gauss rifles).
Those missiles fly a predictable ballistic arc that allow a player fired upon to seek cover. If one is facing the opposite way - a nice lady comes over your speakers and says: "Warning: Incoming Missile."
Those missiles, then, are subject to other factors that can be controlled by you and your team - such as AMS. I don't have the video uploaded - but I do have a pretty good video showing the effect of 3 AMS on my 40-round missile volley even over as short of a distance as 300 meters. I'd estimate it cut them down to about 10 missiles.
If you've, somehow, failed to understand all of this, but have basic instincts - you should be able to torso-twist to control where you want most of the damage to go - even spreading it around, yourself, if it's a stream instead of a 'wall' of missiles.
And if you don't understand any of that... then, well, you aren't much use to your team, anyway - and your use to them was being a brief distraction for the LRMs.
And, of course, there are times when you need to spot for yourself... which means -you- must maintain the track and the lock. It means -you- are exposed to fire (though, most of the time, you are to get a clear shot, anyway).
Quote
Do you know why that wasn't happening back when missiles were doing 1.8 points of damage?
There was no host-state rewind. It didn't matter if you aimed - where you were shooting and where the server said you were shooting were two completely different things and the server didn't have a protocol for dealing with discrepencies.
I could dance around in front of an Atlas with a good 500-700 meter buffer region and just slaughter him.
Now you get clocked in the face from 1000+ meters and damned near lose a torso over it.
Quote
What you're saying is that it is balanced for your team to bring along a mech that is completely reliant upon other mechs to spot, survive, and maneuver for its primary weapon systems to be 'effective;' dealing a maximum of 36 saturation damage to a target after roughly 6-10 seconds of flight-time (with a follow-on 36 saturation damage after 4.5 seconds) - while another team can bring along a mech that can kill whatever is in front of it in 10-15 seconds.
If your spotter happens into the mech the other team chose to bring along - he's lucky to be alive when your first salvo hits, damned lucky to be alive after the second salvo hits... and either broken contact or dead by time your third hits.
Quote
No travel time.
Single-segment damage delivery.
No AMS.
No ECM.
Less ability for target to mitigate damage (torso twist, acceleration/deceleration, cover, etc).
Quote
There were plenty of snipers and ballistic builds running around when LRMs were at double the damage they do right now.
Before Host-State rewind made them much more competitive builds.
You're looking at this from the wrong angle.
The question is: "Can you provide effective support to your team with this support weapon in a chassis designed to field it in a primary support role?"
The answer involves a more complex analysis - but the scenario where a team can sit back and let their LRM player drop missiles into the enemy over time is just not realistic.
If the average skirmish lasts 20 seconds - you need to be able to, as a support player, provide meaningful support to your ally in that skirmish within 15 seconds, preferably ten.
For LRMs - that means two to three salvos is your 'sweet spot.' If you aren't able to tip the scales of a skirmish with those two salvos - then you're not really worth bringing along. Be it due to pilot skill, weapon balance quirks, poor design choices, etc.
That doesn't mean able to destroy mechs in those salvos - but 3 solid on-target 40 round salvos uninhibited by AMS should start exposing internals on all but the thickest armored assaults. That's a very long time to be 'under the rain' - and an excepionally long time to be in a skirmish where you're relying on support (possibly just to break contact and make it back to your team).
If it's not giving your ally enough damage to punch through and kill the threat - it should be enough to make the enemy consider breaking off to head for cover (even if it means they don't get to kill your buddy).