67 replies to this topic

[TOGSolid]

Mechwarrior 4 featured ripple fire launchers for both SRMs and LRMs and it helps a lot when it comes to makingml missile weapons easier to balance. You aren't having to worry about them all hitting as one giant alpha when boated heavily.

Another change I'd like to see if for the AMS to be less effective at shooting down missiles not targeted at you. It also should be changed to shoot down a flat missile percentage. For example, the AMS could shoot down 33% of missiles locked on to you but only 5% of missiles shot at your teammates. This way massed AMS support is still useful but it isn't the giant NOPE barrier it is now. Furthermore, small LRM racks can be splashed into builds without them being a waste of space.

[PEEFsmash]

LRMs are doing just fine as they are. They don't need mathwarriors to come and reinvent a perfectly-functioning wheel.

[Deathlike]

Unbound Inferno, on 04 July 2013 - 12:14 PM, said:

Yet that is the point with LRMs as ARTEMIS and TAG are required components if you want that to be your damage dealer. The system in battletech was intended to have the larger launcer reward the player more for the larger mech if you can use it - and the numbers here as supposedly based off that. Yet what we have is the mechanics of it saying the smaller is better with a hardpoint restriction limiting placements.

It penalizes the system to where if you think numbers work where you are just burning ammo cause most of the shots are wasted by the spread.

That is why I want to see it reworked to make it balanced and working as it should be. The larger being the better if you can use it.

But think of it; how much am I talking about?

The LRM20+ARTEMIS is 11 tons, plus 3 tons ammo minimum for 14. That's two PPC cannons.
The LRM20 as it is now deals maybe 4-8 points of damage reliably on the CT.
The PPC can get 10 at max and 20 under long range. And the ERPPC outranges the LRM by a long shot. Oh, and unlimited ammo.

See a problem here? Cause I do.

My hope is the balanced means the LRM20 could deal 10-14 points instead assuming AMS is out of ammo or not a factor. This brings LRMs back into a contending role with its drawbacks.

At this point, missile boats MUST carry TAG, or you're wasting your time. This doesn't even begin to express my disdain for ECM.

I'm not disagreeing with your point about how LRMs should work, but I'm just expressing how these things are working due to what the devs seem to think it is a good idea (it's really a difference of opinion, and it doesn't mean it's a good or bad thing).

Just remember that LRMs need to be balanced correctly here FIRST, because when you introduce Clan LRMs with every bit of tonnage consumed is HALF of the IS version... you have to think beyond the implications of consumed tonnage.

It's kinda like the people clamoring for Streak SRM changes... it needs to be addressed NOW before we have bigger launchers that can easily make or break an existing system.

[Unbound Inferno]

PEEFsmash, on 04 July 2013 - 12:18 PM, said:

LRMs are doing just fine as they are. They don't need mathwarriors to come and reinvent a perfectly-functioning wheel.

They do when I can't use a LRM20 but instead need to use two LRM10s instead.

[TOGSolid]

Don't mind Peef, he's just confused because he can't see our Elo score so he can't tell if the idea is good or not. Poor Peef.

[Sephlock]

[Unbound Inferno]

Adridos, on 04 July 2013 - 12:12 PM, said:

Why don't you download it, then? There's a quasi-tourney in preparation so even if your timezone didn't corrspond with the time when most people play the game, you're sure to see some action.

http://mwomercs.com/...t-phoenix-down/

I would, but when I'm not testing this game and trying to figure out how to help it I'm actually in another or writing. Got plenty of odd things to keep me busy as it is.

[JudgeDeathCZ]

LRM15 is by far best LRM...

[Unbound Inferno]

JudgeDeathCZ, on 16 July 2013 - 11:38 PM, said:

LRM15 is by far best LRM...

On what? An Atlas or Stalker, sure.

But on an Awesome or Catapult that launches the full LRM-15 at once? Nope.

Comparatively my A1 equipped with 6x LRM-5 outdamaged the alternative 2x LRM-15 and 4x Streak SRM-2 every time - even before the Streak nerf recently. Now its a no-question on it. The LRM-5s consistently land hits better, and kills mechs faster through CT coring in their current style than the LRM-15 ever did.

[El Bandito]

Unbound Inferno, on 04 July 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

Right there. That's what I want to see. How hard is it to ask for that? Anyway Victor Morson is cooking up something else on his own LRM test lately, but I have been working feverishly to try and rationalize the LRM balance issues I see. Right now from what I can tell the LRM10 is the best version to load and boat, making the LRM15 and LRM20 pointless. The LRM5 would be better, but hardpoint restrictions makes that undoable. Why? Missile Spread. The designers at PGI are using a pathing for the missiles from the launcher to the target - using the center of the target as the ending point, ends up being your lovable CT. I don't mind, and it makes sense. But the issue is the missiles launched fire in a single shot spread. A LRM 5 volley is a tight packed shot, but easily picked off by AMS. The LRM10 is bigger but cna punch through, the LRM15 gets larger and the LRM20 from my beloved C4 is friggin useless. Consistently tests I run have the LRM10 currently at the most effective, and boated on my C4 in a LRM40 is consistently outperforming the dual LRM20 it should have. Every time. To further test it, I ran a LRM40 on my A1. 2x LRM10 and 4x LRM5 - dangerous as hell to do, but the damage was even higher. I didn't mind the results, I can core a Stalker in 4 or 5 shots reliably. Wait... I recall using my LRM40 C4 with dual LRM20s and it took... alot more. Grr... EDIT: I forgote to note, but I cannot see a rational difference between the LRM15 and LRM10 for CT damage. The rest is nice, but its superficial compared to the focus of brining a mech down. Since the LRMs only target the center of the mech, I can't justify the additional damage to other parts compared to the focal of it - since I am forced to hit center anyway, the LRM10 tighter grouping is continually rewarding better ammo usage and per shot usage than the LRM15. To add insult to injury the recharge times and heat penalizes the builds. The smaller launchers overhead while the larger dealt it better - but the larger can't damage nearly as effectively while being worse for ammo usage. That and it annoys me that the LRMs are supposed to reward larger launchers with more damage at the same pace if you can fit the tonnage and crit requirements. Instead the recharge penalizes the larger even further by reducing the damage output. But why does the Stalker do so well? Its got LRM10 tubes. It forces the LRM15 and LRM20 to fire in the LRM10 pattern. As a result its a tighter spread damage and pays itself off. Oh, and I found a glitch. I can load up my A1 with its 2x 15 missile tubes and launch off a LRM50 in a single volley by loading 4x LRM10 and 2x LRM5. Don't think that's working as intended, but I like it - with the spread of the LRM10 I core mechs almost as bad as the PPC boats. The worst offense I have to admit to? You can't AMS a LRM50 volley like that. At all. So I have been thinking on how to balance it, and I have asked before - see picture above - but I would like to see LRMs launching pattern reworked to fire in volley shots. Its buffs AMS usage and LRM damage only if it gets through. It does cause more CT damage, but its a fair balance for the cost per ton. You can still cover, and fast mechs can dodge it while the LRM is a target needing to aim or loose the shot. My solution: LRM spread is to be set to somewhere between the LRM10 and LRM15 size where the missile arc randomly follows the path to the target within that. Pretty much what we have, just set that for all launchers. Automatically stagger the shot in a salvo pattern to spread the missiles out. This buffs AMS effectiveness for its duration, tightens LRM spread with the current mechanics to improve damage and make them viable in more mech versions. Lastly, bring their recharge times to the same to reward larger loads. I'll use the LRM5 as the base rate. I see two ways to do this, and I prefer the first one. 1) Stagger-fire every 0.1 seconds. The LRM5 launches singles, the LRM10 in pairs, LRM15 in 3 and the LRM20 in 4 missile salvos. Its a total 0.4 second duration. Not too unlike firing a LRM5 from a NARC tube. LRM5 1 Damage 2 Heat 2.85 recharge +0.4 second duration 1 missile per 0.1 seconds LRM10 1 Damage 2 Heat 2.85 recharge +0.4 second duration 2 missiles per 0.1 seconds LRM15 1 Damage 2 Heat 2.85 recharge +0.4 second duration 3 missiles per 0.1 seconds LRM20 1 Damage 2 Heat 2.85 recharge +0.4 second duration 4 missiles per 0.1 seconds 2) Firing off the missiles in a set 5-volley pattern. Stagger the shot somewhat more to 0.2 second to maybe 0.5 second delay to allow AMS to get a shot. LRM5 1 Damage 2 Heat 3.25 recharge 5 missile volley LRM10 1 Damage 2 Heat 3.05 recharge +0.2 second duration 2x 5 missile volley per 0.2 seconds LRM15 1 Damage 2 Heat 2.85 recharge +0.4 second duration 3x 5 missile volley per 0.2 seconds LRM20 1 Damage 2 Heat 2.65 recharge +0.6 second duration 4x 5 missile volley per 0.2 seconds 3) Ideally: Allow the user to swap between volley and stagger shot missiles like the ECM can swap. Default to the stagger but allow to swap to volley. With the current pathing the damage averages out for the better, so the reduction in damage is needed per missile. This helps keep the larger boats from being too overpowered as well, but really doesn't change the output of certain ones like a Stalker who relied on that tighter spread anyway. But ti rewards other users without penalizing them on a whole too much. AMS damage might need to be brought down to balance how effective it could become, but I think it might be fine where it is now. EDITED: added numbers for what I assume is fairly close to accurate to show what I intend This shows the scaling effect, rough projected numbers as it appears. I based it off the assumption of basically full-launch effects from a Catapult as its intended to do eventually I believe.

A1 doesn't have TAG BTW. Can't do crap against an ECM mech.

[Unbound Inferno]

El Bandito, on 17 July 2013 - 01:03 AM, said:

A1 doesn't have TAG BTW. Can't do crap against an ECM mech.

LOL - I know that perfectly well on a solo basis, I tend to drive it lately.

Really wish they'd fix the ECM balance.

[Reptilizer]

Unbound Inferno, on 04 July 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

EDITED: added numbers for what I assume is fairly close to accurate to show what I intend

This shows the scaling effect, rough projected numbers as it appears. I based it off the assumption of basically full-launch effects from a Catapult as its intended to do eventually I believe.

Stagger-fire for the win! Brilliant idea. Like.

Edited by Reptilizer, 17 July 2013 - 04:47 AM.

[Unbound Inferno]

Reptilizer, on 17 July 2013 - 04:46 AM, said:

Stagger-fire for the win! Brilliant idea. Like.

That is what I'd want. It buffs AMS to a crazy level if found in groups, but that kills the whiners. In return the damage output of the LRM is balanced better - and it doesn't take a new mechanic system to do it.

Just set the spread pattern and stagger missiles out of the launch tubes. It makes using the larger launchers worth it since they won't suffer or benefit on any boating style.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

If you do your proposed changes, LRM's end up in the same boat as the LBX-10.

You can't have a bunch of weapons that don't do enough damage AND spread it all over creation, while you have pinpoint damage and instant convergence from other weapons.

No offense, but your spreadsheets don't apply properly to actual game play.

[Reptilizer]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 July 2013 - 04:58 AM, said:

If you do your proposed changes, LRM's end up in the same boat as the LBX-10.

You can't have a bunch of weapons that don't do enough damage AND spread it all over creation, while you have pinpoint damage and instant convergence from other weapons.

No offense, but your spreadsheets don't apply properly to actual game play.

Well, i did not do the spreadsheets, but as far as i understood, every missile volley gets the spread of an LRM5. In the game (no AMS present) this would actually translate to a relative damage increase, because less missiles from the bigger launchers miss their target because of bad spread. This will be somewhat diminished by a higher destruction rate from any AMS present, but i would think this a fair trade off, that is at least worth a try!

[Unbound Inferno]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 July 2013 - 04:58 AM, said:

If you do your proposed changes, LRM's end up in the same boat as the LBX-10.

You can't have a bunch of weapons that don't do enough damage AND spread it all over creation, while you have pinpoint damage and instant convergence from other weapons.

No offense, but your spreadsheets don't apply properly to actual game play.

Reptilizer, on 17 July 2013 - 05:07 AM, said:

Well, i did not do the spreadsheets, but as far as i understood, every missile volley gets the spread of an LRM5. In the game (no AMS present) this would actually translate to a relative damage increase, because less missiles from the bigger launchers miss their target because of bad spread. This will be somewhat diminished by a higher destruction rate from any AMS present, but i would think this a fair trade off, that is at least worth a try!

More like an LRM-12 is what I want. Right between a LRM10 and LRM15 volley, which I think is good to split it up outside just CT coring.

Its hardly a LBX suffering situation as it only really harms single LRM-5 use. The boating returns would then be comparable from LRM-10 up, regardless of how its done, leaving a bit better on the relative scale.


Optimistically, spreading the damage by the new Streak targeting mechanic would be best. However I don't think it should continue the lump-sum launches as its doing now as AMS is useless that way.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

What I don't get is...staggered missile launches suck.

Period.

What you guys are asking for is a nerf to LRM's, there is no way around it.

Unless you signifigantly up their damage, mechs will take less damage due to the staggered format.

The reason the LRM 5 Cat works is because they aren't staggered. They come out in a blob and use the LRM 5 spread.

If you chain fire the LRM 5's the damage goes in the toilet. It can be annoying, but that's it.

[Unbound Inferno]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 July 2013 - 05:24 AM, said:

What I don't get is...staggered missile launches suck.

Period.

What you guys are asking for is a nerf to LRM's, there is no way around it.

Unless you signifigantly up their damage, mechs will take less damage due to the staggered format.

The reason the LRM 5 Cat works is because they aren't staggered. They come out in a blob and use the LRM 5 spread.

If you chain fire the LRM 5's the damage goes in the toilet. It can be annoying, but that's it.

Not true- if there is no AMS.

As I said, its intended to buff AMS so it does its job - but the way AMS works it will never outlast a dedicated LRM launcher.

Also, the damage from a 6x LRM-5 Cat A1 is identical from full-force or taking 6x shots if they all land. And truthfully, the staggered is better for a moving target as they are bound to turn to a favorable direction or stop for some reason in a fight to get their bearings or aim.

[LordBraxton]

There is no way in hell LRMs need a buff

They are at a good point

If you are smart, they won't hit you often at all

But get caught out of position once, and they wreck you like no other weapon can

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 05:30 AM, said:

Not true- if there is no AMS.

As I said, its intended to buff AMS so it does its job - but the way AMS works it will never outlast a dedicated LRM launcher.

Also, the damage from a 6x LRM-5 Cat A1 is identical from full-force or taking 6x shots if they all land. And truthfully, the staggered is better for a moving target as they are bound to turn to a favorable direction or stop for some reason in a fight to get their bearings or aim.

So like I said, you want to nerf LRM's.

AMS is great, I mount it on my mechs that mount LRM's and own the hell out of other LRM mechs because of it.

I really don't think you play with LRM's as much as you like to pretend based on what you are asking to do.