20 replies to this topic

[Arcturious]

I've spent quite a while recently trying to play some builds as intended for their hardpoints and canon.

LRM10 in a Dragon. LRM10 + Artemis in a Cent-D and the new QKD-4G again with an LRM10 + Artemis.

These all were running with TAG, usually a BAP if I could squeeze it in. A minimum of 4T of ammo (720 shots).

In every single match I have found these weapon systems to be completely, utterly useless. I ended each game feeling like by doing this testing, I had doomed the team to failure. On these lighter mech classes, sticking to the intended hardpoint restrictions I simply was not effective.

In one recent game, I used up almost every single LRM, in Caustic on mechs that were standing in the open. I was the second last person to die, I had to work hard to keep effective distance, keep a lock with LoS and keep TAG on targets. Yet for all my work and one of the better games I've played I simply couldn't score a kill and ended with only 300 damage.

Another game in the CN9-D, this time in Canyons. I worked like a boss around their flanks using my speed from the XL300 to keep harassing them with LRM's. I again fired almost every LRM available. I was the last person left alive on my team and had played an exhausting and tough match where I had done everything humanly possible to try and win. It took 5 of them to run me to ground as they started capping our base forcing me to close with them. I ended that game with only 220 ish damage.

This is just two examples from my testing. There were plenty more nail biting games over the last week where I was the last person left alive, trying desperately to do any damage at all to the enemy before being dragged down. In every instance I found myself thinking "If I had even a single Large Laser I may have been able to win this". In most of these mechs, by taking at least 11T for TAG, LRM10+A and 4T ammo you usually only have room left for a few ML's and HS.

Basically, the idea of the LRM as a support and armour weakening weapon is simply not possible when using only a single launcher. No matter how well you play you simply can't contribute to the match.

This is easily seen in the sheer amount of people running SRM's or SSRM's in hardpoints originally intended for an LRM10 or LRM15.

To put it simply, the work done on LRM's is nowhere near at a correct balance yet. I go so far as to say its even worse than SRM's as you see far more of those being fielded than the single LRM launchers.

I haven't seen anything from a Dev saying they are going to be tweaked (in the short term, I'm fully aware missiles as a whole are eventually going to get another pass), but something has to be done to make these weapon systems viable again. At the moment, anyone running them is basically forcing their team to play a man down for the match. Like the SRM and PPC balancing needed, this has to come soon as new players building mechs based on canon or simply their own choice of play style are going to fail.

That's about it, didn't want my testing to go to waste so have posted - I know there are threads about LRM already, however they need to be balanced so each launcher feels useful. Not balanced so that they are viable when boated.

Edits: Posting from phone fail.

Edited by Arcturious, 27 June 2013 - 04:04 PM.

[Sintaichi]

You should provide an example of what is limiting your DPS, I don't think it just magically disappears. I run fire support mechs with Gauss/PPCs/Lasers + LRMs on occasion and I have never felt that the LRMs were in any way holding them back. The trick to actually running it is using a smaller engine for me, and thus larger launchers & lasers. The problem running a build like this poses is that it's difficult to use in a pug, because once a mech closes on you within minimum range you can't use a good portion of your load-out anymore. In a group it's pretty easy to single the guy out and get back to shooting long range targets, but I could see how it was difficult alone.

The only other problem I can see is that AMS is exceptionally effective at getting rid of a single LRM5 or LRM10 volley, and I'm not really sure what to tell you there. Bring a friend and fire at the same time?

[Sephlock]

Don't worry, the whiners are getting SSRMs nerfed too- and SRM buffs are nowhere in sight!

Soon you'll be forced to use energy and ballistic weapons (read: ppcs and gauss), as intended.

[blinkin]

the 2x LRM 20 on my hunchback 4sp work pretty well as long as i am with a group and have decent scouts (standard LRM limitation).

any buff that they need is pretty minor 0.1-0.2 damage per missile maybe.

[Kiiyor]

I somewhat agree - but (IMHO) the lower damage is why LRM's are leaning more towards support weapon than a primary, boatable weapon.

While they do lack raw damage, the concentration and application of that damage to the centre of battlemech mass is what makes them dangerous, especially with artemis and tag. They are intimidating for this reason, but not deadly (unless you boat, of course). Even with the increase in missile speed, it is still relatively easy to get to cover and avoid a sustained barrage. If you boat them, and rely on indirect fire (which they are more than lackluster at), you're going to be disappointed.

If you throw in a weapon that can take advantage of the holes LRM's have poked in armour, like a PPC or two, Gauss or any of the longer ranged flavours of dakka, then they become utterly deadly. Open with direct fire while you are getting a lock, fire missiles, enemy panics when they see missiles incoming and tries to get to cover, and are less likely to retaliate with direct fire themselves.

I like them in their current state. To me, their current utility is where I want all weapon systems to go; best when used in convert with other weapon systems.

TLDR; missiles are far more deadly when used with direct fire weapon systems.

[Skyfaller]

a single lrm10 is doing like 12 damage spread over 4 to 5 sections... so its like hitting a mech with small laser in all those locations. You wont expect to take a heavy or assault that way.

However, LRMs are useful to soften a target before you close in. Just the fact that you can zip around nearly 100kph from 1km tossing damage while they can't hit you means less work for you when you do get in close.

Case in point, a stalker with 4 LRM15s and artemis is deadly. But same stalker with 2 LRM10, 2 LRM5 with artemis and 2 PPCs (damage is = in both setups) is far deadlier. You have to combine the weapons.

Mediums should not be loading LRMs. Their missile hardpoints are for SRMs to add up the damage along with their medium lasers.

[Devil Fox]

Unless you boat at minimum 2 ALRM15's or greater as your main weapons, LRM's aren't too effective except as harassment and deterrent weapons. I ran my Quickdraws when I was bothers with LRM10's and 5's, but backed them up with 2 LL and 2ML. This gave me something to hammer and isolate targets at range with softening fire whilst I had alot of pinpoint alpha damage to take advantage of the LRM to CT mechanic.

I like integrated balance builds, all my Highlanders run a Guass, 3ML for pinpoint CT coring and 2 ALRM15's to open or finish that CT. It's all about a balance between purely LRM damage (which is spread across targets) and pinpoint alpha attacks. All Boat's should have some pinpoint punch to back up their LRm's, whether it's the 4ML of a Catapult or the 3ML of a Trebuchet.

[The Cheese]

Skyfaller, on 27 June 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

a single lrm10 is doing like 12 damage spread over 4 to 5 sections... so its like hitting a mech with small laser in all those locations. You wont expect to take a heavy or assault that way.

Well when you count the almost completely unavoidable loss of damage from missiles that outright missed the target, you're looking at more like 8 damage.

Skyfaller, on 27 June 2013 - 04:40 PM, said:

Mediums should not be loading LRMs. Their missile hardpoints are for SRMs to add up the damage along with their medium lasers.

There's a particular model of Hunchback that would disagree with that...

The only reason I can think of for mediums to refrain from loading up LRMs is because weight matching is so ineffective.

Edited by The Cheese, 27 June 2013 - 04:54 PM.

[Victor Morson]

I tried and tried to make a case for my twin LRM15 medium concept working in serious games, hoping I could get it to work. No dice. The damage just isn't there to punish in the open targets, and the indirect fire is too weak to make that extra chip damage worth it. It's better to go direct fire and deliver high damage alphas in the end.

It's so close, too. In my "idealized patch notes" thread I'd buff LRM recycle by 10% and also increase the damage per missile from 1.1 to 1.2. I think that'd make them a great gun and increase their DPS in a decent way.

That and reduce AMS range.

[Lootee]

The Cheese, on 27 June 2013 - 04:46 PM, said:

There's a particular model of Hunchback that would disagree with that...

The Trebuchet too. The Shadow Hawk and Griffin (whenever they announce it) will have LRMs as well.

[PEEFsmash]

Better for them to be balanced in large numbers and underpowered in small numbers than to be balanced in small numbers and overpowered in large numbers, and I think that's the dichotomy. The former is the only legitimate option.

[General Taskeen]

PEEFsmash, on 27 June 2013 - 04:49 PM, said:

Better for them to be balanced in large numbers and underpowered in small numbers than to be balanced in small numbers and overpowered in large numbers, and I think that's the dichotomy. The former is the only legitimate option.

That's just dumb and not even thinking outside the box.

Otherwise the lowest weapon remains pointless, like LRM5s.

Edited by General Taskeen, 27 June 2013 - 04:53 PM.

[Arcturious]

I think the point has been missed a little in translation. I deliberately was testing for the intended use of a hardpoint. Blinkin's example (if not meant sarcastically) proves the point exactly.

The 4SP has launchers that cap at 6 tubes. They aren't even designed for LRM at all.

AMS is a good example of this. It was fine, designed to take down about an LRM5. Multiple AMS would mostly protect from the single LRM20 in an atlas etc. It's called saturating point defence. Catapults had a deliberate advantage in being able to output enough LRM to get through.

However, the game has slowly slipped into balancing for boating only. AMS was increased in efficiency to compensate for the poor balance of LRM etc. Any argument stating to take bigger launchers or more LRM has misunderstood what I've been trying to test for.

I'm sure the devs are aware of the problem. They can see the stats. However it really needs more attention as most people are trying to balance around multiple launchers with hugely inflated numbers far beyond the intended purpose of the mech. Because at the moment, I can bet that the first thing anyone experienced in the game does when buying a new mech that came with an LRM10 or even LRM15 is to strip it off.

We effectively have a situation where an entire class of weapon system is obsolete and unworkable. That's simply not good for the game in the long run. I really hope PGI has a plan to deal with these sorts if problems, preferably in the short term as this lack of options and counter intuitive mech design is hurting the game.

Take the Thunderbolt for example. Running the single LRM15 as designed in that mech would be suicide as it stands. It's only going to get further out of control the longer the situation continues.

[Deathlike]

General Taskeen, on 27 June 2013 - 04:51 PM, said:

That's just dumb and not even thinking outside the box.

Otherwise the lowest weapon remains pointless, like LRM5s.

TBH, I kinda agree with PEEF's sentiment. If regular LRMs are "OK" in small numbers, they will be really OP in large numbers.

What is more tangible is to rework AMS altogether... and that requires a lot more thought to getting it to work differently that won't eat LRM5 and LRM10 alive...

[Livewyr]

Balance weapons against themselves, then Boating is already balanced.

(Missiles are fine the way they are- maybe +.1, but I don't think even that is necessary)
Stalkers with a lot of LRMs make a serious sacrifice to do so, namely anything within 180 meters...

[Unbound Inferno]

I have run Catapults pretty exclusively and I can agree, unless it was two LRM15 for a LRM30 the output wasn't dealing enough damage at all - and even then its marginal on a per-hit basis. The sustained damage from several launches and shock factor is another issue.

The shock effect of missile incoming still works well, no arguments as that's a mostly human response.

The damage requiring such a long amount of time to deliver is pathetic. I shouldn't need to launch 4-5 times to begin to see significant damage on a mech when they have no AMS cover. I agree LRMpocolypse was pretty out of line, but we should be seeing more damage from them.

Then there is the Streak and SRM damage that is pathetic too...

[Sybreed]

eh, I've always said LRMs won't ever be balanced with boating the only norm in MWO. Either a single LRM-10 or 20 is good and boating becomes stupidly too strong or boating becomes "just right" and single LRM-10 or 20 is utter crap. It's bad design and anyone with half a brain knows it.

Edited by Sybreed, 27 June 2013 - 07:20 PM.

[Arcturious]

That's exactly the problem though. Each weapon needs to have fairly equitable pros / cons when compared directly using the existing variables (heat, ammo, tonnage, slots, range, cool down etc). You can then have situational or stacking modifiers (TAG etc). Tactical application of weapons is factored off these variables. Such as no LoS needed, therefore time to target is increased. There are counters to everything. The basic facts though should be a like for like comparison, and the players create the application in game.

So when comparing an LRM10+A and 1T ammo for 7 tons, 4 slots vs a PPC for 7T, 3 slots you should be able to see pros and cons for both. Direct fire vs indirect. Counters such as ECM vs pinpoint damage. Cool down time vs heat. Finally, the utility should be roughly approximate once all factors are considered.

Boating itself then becomes a mechanic to be balanced. It relies on factors such as tonnage, missile tubes, heat, ammo and others. The solution is to make sure boating itself is tuned, not the weapons that comprise the boating.

You could (off the top of my head) limit tubes for example by having them be more restricted to only allow a certain number of missiles through, hard capped to the actual hardpoint's model. Or PGI's extra heat when firing multiples of weapons (which I don't agree though) . Or any other number of boating counters that have been suggested in the forums. The point being to utilise the games existing mechanics to create balance.

Surely out of all the variables we have available to tune, we can tackle boating without allowing boating to be THE primary determining factor in building your mech. That is a horrible situation for a game to find itself in, if everything becomes based around the idea of force multiplication you invalidate every single other option from your player base.

[Demuder]

I agree, tonnage spent on anything less than LRM30 would be better spent on another type of weapon. But as many said, that is because of the current game mechanics, it is simply not possible to have sane damage on a LRM10 build and a LRM40 build. Balancing one will turn the other to being overpowered or underpowered.

The solution is in balancing boat mechanics, and not specificaly LRMs - or any boatable weapon for that matter. Specifically for LRMs that could be done possibly by adjusting missile tubes as Arcturius suggests on each mech, but I would much rather see a universal solution to boating like Homeless Bill's.

Edited by dimstog, 29 June 2013 - 01:04 AM.

[Damascas]

I have been using 2 LRM 20s on my founder's Atlas for awhile to soften up other assaults or provide fire support as I close on melees and I personally find them highly effective. LRMs will not get you kills but they inflict damage all around in my experience which helps a little.