39 replies to this topic

[Carrioncrows]

Here is the Skinny:

We need something along the lines of analog missiles.

Here is an Example: I have a Quickdraw-4H, it has x2 LRM15's in the torso and 1 LRM10 in the Center torso. So my HUD would look like this:



Each one of those circles represents a Single LRM. So what happens when you drop targeting sights over a Enemy mech?

Lets take an Atlas with a Single LRM15 for ease of use -



So when you drop that targeting cursor over an enemy mech those missiles begin to fill up! Each red filled circle represents a "LOCKED ON" LRM.

Hold it on long enough and all missiles achieve full "LOCKED ON"


So what happens if I have full lock and take my targeting Cursor off my target?

Well your missiles begin to unfill and your missiles begin to lose lock




So what happens once I launch my missiles?

Provided you keep the targeting Cursor on target all "LOCKED ON" Missiles will hit, but if you go off target your missiles will begin to lose lock.

Once you have lost lock while missiles are in mid-flight they are unable to regain lock on.

This is what I mean by analog lock on.

So what about SRM's?

All SRM's should be able to lock on just like the above pictures with some caveats of course, that they have realistic missile agility and we remove splash from the game. Now you of course can dumb fire your missiles at any time even if you've only achieved partial lock.

So What about Streaks?

Works just like SRM's but with the caveat that they have slightly better missile agility and won't fire until you have achieved full lock on, so a person can hold their finger on the trigger and once all missiles lock on they launch.

We are within months of hitting Launch and the missiles are seriously not working and needs a major revamp. The above is the first step.

For Breakdown see this Thread: http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__2410200

You want Video 3 - 20:20 in.

[xenoglyph]

Moog missiles FTW.

[The Cheese]

Looks interesting enough, but why do we need it?

It seems to me that this would further push LRMs into their niche, while not really having any noticeable effect on other missile types other than making SRMs now a tracking weapon.

Edited by The Cheese, 02 July 2013 - 07:54 PM.

[Carrioncrows]

The Cheese, on 02 July 2013 - 07:48 PM, said:

Looks interesting enough, but why do we need it?

It seems to me that this would further push LRMs into their niche, while not really having any noticeable effect on other missile types other than making SRMs now a tracking weapon.

Because it promotes skill.

ALL MISSILES SHOULD LOCK ON -

So LRM's, STREAKS and yes SRM's

So if you are pit fighting against someone and you launch missiles whatever they are and they take evasive action causing you to lose your lock on some of your missiles that is SKILL.

An Attacking Player can use skill to maximize their missiles hit and damage and alternatively a defending player can use skill to minimize the incoming missiles hit and damage.

This all promotes skill and good counter play.

None of the fire and forget shenanigans.

EDIT: Also this is to pave the way for Streak-4 and Streak-6 missiles so that SRM's don't instantly become useless the moment the clans drop.

Edited by Carrioncrows, 02 July 2013 - 08:01 PM.

[The Cheese]

Carrioncrows, on 02 July 2013 - 07:59 PM, said:

Because it promotes skill.

ALL MISSILES SHOULD LOCK ON -

So LRM's, STREAKS and yes SRM's

So if you are pit fighting against someone and you launch missiles whatever they are and they take evasive action causing you to lose your lock on some of your missiles that is SKILL.

An Attacking Player can use skill to maximize their missiles hit and damage and alternatively a defending player can use skill to minimize the incoming missiles hit and damage.

This all promotes skill and good counter play.

None of the fire and forget shenanigans.

Well there are no fire and forget shenanigans for LRMs right now, but I can see how it could be a good balancer for SSRMs.

I don't see how this would be good for LRMs (and they certainly don't need to be made worse). It seems to me that this would make it easier than it is now to evade them while not giving any advantage to the attacker to balance it out.

Edited by The Cheese, 02 July 2013 - 08:11 PM.

[Aim64C]

Carrioncrows, on 02 July 2013 - 07:59 PM, said:

Because it promotes skill.

You have a strange concept of the meaning of that word.

Quote

ALL MISSILES SHOULD LOCK ON -

So LRM's, STREAKS and yes SRM's

So if you are pit fighting against someone and you launch missiles whatever they are and they take evasive action causing you to lose your lock on some of your missiles that is SKILL.

An Attacking Player can use skill to maximize their missiles hit and damage and alternatively a defending player can use skill to minimize the incoming missiles hit and damage.

This all promotes skill and good counter play.

None of the fire and forget shenanigans.

Fire and forget?

Hardly. LRMs are hardly effective. They seem to suffer from the same hit detection bugs a lot of other weapons do - only in the extremes. Entire salvos go unregistered (or just a few missiles register with the server).

There's a few scenarios where they're decent - like when you have an Atlas that seems to have a hitbox designed to catch every missile on the CT - but they're really only a good team weapon when you have a set of good scouts that can stagger in and out of cover to keep a solid track on the target and light it up occasionally with TAG.... and two or more dedicated LRM "boats."

Otherwise - indirect fire is mostly dumped into empty terrain or the side of buildings. I have been more successful dumb-firing into the enemy at range rather than trying to use indirect fire.

Unless you plan to fix and buff missiles in their effectiveness, considerably (such as reducing their launch-to-impact time to around 2 seconds at 800 meters), then you may as well take them out of the game if you're going with this model.

For LRMs - this doesn't work.

Quote

EDIT: Also this is to pave the way for Streak-4 and Streak-6 missiles so that SRM's don't instantly become useless the moment the clans drop.

This would work, however, for SRMs. Standard SRMs could be fired dumb or half-locked. Streaks would only fire locked missiles - but not necessarily all missiles will be locked.

You've probably come up with the best way to implement Streaks and SRMs I've ever come across.

[Carrioncrows]

The Cheese, on 02 July 2013 - 08:11 PM, said:

Well there are no fire and forget shenanigans for LRMs right now, but I can see how it could be a good balancer for SSRMs.

I don't see how this would be good for LRMs (and they certainly don't need to be made worse). It seems to me that this would make it easier than it is now to evade them while not giving any advantage to the attacker to balance it out.

Then watch the video to find out.

Talks about upping LRM speed, increasing damage, doing away with splash, giving LRM's a 1500m maximum range, ect ect.

This is only the first step.

Aim64C, on 02 July 2013 - 08:25 PM, said:

You have a strange concept of the meaning of that word.

See above, see the video -

The video introduces you to an entire new vison mode that you can switch to for the purpose of indirect firing LRM's and "other" mech mounted artillery.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

It's an interesting mechanic that I'd not mind trying out for a few patch cycles if PGI could get it working.

I do like our current dumb-fire SRMs, though. Having LRMs and SSRMs use this system might well be good enough.

[xengk]

Love me some Panzer Dragoon.

[Tennex]

not a bad idea. its very complicated though.

and seems hard to code, so i'm content with what we have for LRMs right now.

[Unbound Inferno]

This is a horrible idea. No, for any number of reasons to boot.

Your increasing the lock-on time for the missiles to be salvo'd? And require the pilot to remain aimed at the target mech? Do you have any idea what you are asking? Anyone wanting to use LRMs would be gimp'd to hell and back because they'd be forced to be a sitting duck. No torso-twist under fire, limited mobility - dead target to get shot at. To top that off, the only useable application would be indirect fire which places the requirements of useful in a very limited list of times. You'll be under fire and moving at some point in the game, and this would only be a crutch. So no.

To top it off, the mechanics in this game can't support it. They have an in-system mechanic to maintain the missile launch, spread and target flightpath. The entire thing would need to be reworked to have this so each missile follows their own individual flightpath and tracking instead of a simpler group listing. Instead of having 4 launchers to track it would need to follow 40, 60.. 80 different missiles. It would never be done for that alone. To say nothing of how horrible it makes LRMs to use in any aspect of the game except for that indirect level.

[The Cheese]

Carrioncrows, on 02 July 2013 - 08:32 PM, said:

Talks about upping LRM speed, increasing damage, doing away with splash, giving LRM's a 1500m maximum range, ect ect.

I did watch the part of the video you're referring to (please, for the love of god, get a new mic). The problem with all that is that LRMs don't really have any problem (that your idea would address) at close-ish range, which is where the effects of your idea would be most noticeable. The problem is when the target is very far away, as they have much more opportunity to break lock before the missiles hit. With your idea, it would be even easier still for someone to minimise the damage they take while making it that much harder for an attacker to get a lock.

My problem isn't with the actual mechanic you're describing. It definitely seems to need more attention on the part of the attacker, while giving the victim more chance to affect the outcome. The issue is the balance there. It makes life much easier for the defender while making it slightly harder for the attacker.

[Otto Cannon]

You say missiles 'need' a new overcomplicated lock system without actually stating what you think is 'broken' about them. I think the absolute last thing the game needs right now is PGI trying to change LRMs yet again after they finally got them working in a reasonable way.

[Carrioncrows]

Unbound Inferno, on 02 July 2013 - 08:50 PM, said:

Your increasing the lock-on time for the missiles to be salvo'd? And require the pilot to remain aimed at the target mech? Do you have any idea what you are asking?

1. You didn't watch the video. It addresses all of these issues you explains why in more depth.
2. This is miles easier to program than the junk we have now - Spread, Aiming, Trajectories, Artemis, tag, narc blah blah bonus's in centimeters.
3 They already have the code for Streaks locking onto a mechs skeletal structure and different "Bones" The work is already done they just have to apply it to LRM's and SRM's

The Cheese, on 02 July 2013 - 09:55 PM, said:

I did watch the part of the video you're referring to (please, for the love of god, get a new mic). The problem with all that is that LRMs don't really have any problem (that your idea would address) at close-ish range, which is where the effects of your idea would be most noticeable. The problem is when the target is very far away, as they have much more opportunity to break lock before the missiles hit. With your idea, it would be even easier still for someone to minimise the damage they take while making it that much harder for an attacker to get a lock.

My problem isn't with the actual mechanic you're describing. It definitely seems to need more attention on the part of the attacker, while giving the victim more chance to affect the outcome. The issue is the balance there. It makes life much easier for the defender while making it slightly harder for the attacker.

This may floor you but in Table Top, Missiles like LRM's RARELY hit with a full Salvo. It was just a rare thing. This requires skill and god forbid actual participation on the user's part to maximize his salvo.

LRM's right now never miss, well unless your a light going mach 10 and the LRM's just can't keep up.
Oh if they happen to hit cover or you lose lock that isn't missing.
The only thing that controls how many missiles hit really just comes down to AMS.

As I said what we can do is pump up the LRM speed. Right now they are at 120, previously they were at 100. With the above changes in the video you would crank them up to 150-180 speed.

And you gain the option to fire them up to 1500 meters. Sure after 1000m you begin to lose missile lock on your missiles until they reach max range or hit something and detonate.

This all improves the quality of the game, keeps the spirit of the game and flushes out a lot of the hate and anger of some of the cheap like tactics. Getting plowed by a QUAD LRM15 missile boat? Grats you cored in 1 hit and dead in 2 - GG now **** sorta play style.

Give us some skill.

At least this way you get hammered by Quad LRM15's and you were doing your damnest to dance and be evasive at least you know that player was skilled enough to keep the targeting cursor on you the whole time and get that many missiles to strike.

Otto Cannon, on 02 July 2013 - 10:17 PM, said:

You say missiles 'need' a new overcomplicated lock system without actually stating what you think is 'broken' about them. I think the absolute last thing the game needs right now is PGI trying to change LRMs yet again after they finally got them working in a reasonable way.

Lots of reasons, too many to list but I'll name a few of the top ones.
1. Balance - We can balance these weapons with out having to balance them for full savlo's, we can up the speed and the damage but in reality how hard that weapon hits is based upon the target's unput and the user's unput - Just like almost every other weapon out there. You have to keep your shots on target to deal the damage.

This also balances out the missile boats - Multiple missiles launchers or (Boats) would require a lot more effort on their part to maintain and keep their damage output. This doesn't mean it's impossible, in fact you get a solid pilot behind a Missile boat that can track of his targets and he will be a lot more damage than missile boats do now. It just won't all be to the CT of a mech.

2. Role Warfare - Hello lights, you help out anyone with LRM's to Scout, Recon, and Spot for anyone with indirect weapons or direct fire LRM's. Now there is a reason for you instead of the silly C3 computer nonsense we have now.

----
You say reasonable, I say rubbish.

Doesn't matter how skilled I am as a pilot Once I have lock and pull trigger it does the same amount of damage as any new player that manages to obtain lock and pull the trigger.

It's a skill-less weapon, just like streaks.

Now you might argue that there is a tiny amount of skill involved in evading the LRM's people that keep to cover and use it to their advantage. I chalk it up to more of a guy just throw'n lrm's up the air and then seeing what sticks than any actual skill.

Lets put the skill back into it.

[DeadlyNerd]

StreakLRMs

[The Cheese]

I think you're underestimating how hard it is to be consistently effective in an LRM boat at anything but the newbie levels, especially in a team environment.

I definitely agree that the core-homing thing that they do now is a problem that should be addressed, but I'd rather see that done in such a way that makes the weapon more controllable by the dev team. I'm convinced now that most of the problems they have had in balancing them has been a direct result of using a tracking system and damage delivery mechanic that together yeilds inconsistent results.

Edited by The Cheese, 03 July 2013 - 01:43 AM.

[yashmack]

I just dont see a benefit to this idea...

[Radbane]

With your system 4xLRM5 > 1xLRM20. I could charge up 4 missiels 5 steps faster than 1 missile 20 steps. Everyone would do LRM5's and fire more ofthen instead of the big launchers which would take ages to lock on. Didn't think this one through?

Also, I cringe everytime I hear that skill is all about being able to put the cursor on the target. That would make a digital version of Whack-A-Mole the ultimate E-sport game.

[Otto Cannon]

Ah, the old 'no skill' argument. So what's your hit rate with lrms? I'm guessing that like most other people it's not above around 30%.

Yes you can easily use lrms badly, just like you can easily use a ppc badly. Seeing the lock and pressing your mouse button is just as skill-less as seeing your crosshairs over a big slow target and pressing your mouse button. Both are as easy as clicking the mwo icon to open the game.
A good brawler will take into account lots of details as well as the basic leading distance, and a good lrm support pilot will also take a large number of factors into account to get the most from the weapon system.
I'm not going to bother listing everything but lrms have a big minimum range, you have to place yourself and move constantly to maintain an optimal firing range. With other weapons you aim and fire, with lrms you aim and fire tag and then fire the missiles and then hold the lock while the missiles fly to the target. Whether you hit or not depends largely on your skill at target selection because your ammo will be wasted if you have poor situational awareness and target an enemy behind scenery or about to move behind scenery or about to move out of range or about to be covered by ecm or amongst a few ams systems or moving too fast... you get the idea.

Using lrms well is skillful. I always know when the support mech knows his stuff because it makes a huge difference- you don't spend the match watching missile salvoes hit rocks and lose lock on targets instead of helping the team. Those new players you seem to think need a targeting nerf to make lrms harder for them aren't doing much damage with them anyway. There just isn't any need for your idea.

[The Cheese]

Radbane, on 03 July 2013 - 01:57 AM, said:

That would make a digital version of Whack-A-Mole the ultimate E-sport game.

Go on...