67 replies to this topic

[Sheraf]

My dual LRM20+Artemis is working just fine on my Stalker 3H. It is depend on the amount of tubes on the mech I believe. If anyone still die to LRM now, try to get better at using cover, and control your movement.

Edited by Sheraf, 17 July 2013 - 05:49 AM.

[Reptilizer]

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.

You are mixing up a game mechanic with raw damage.
The mechanic now punishes you for taking anything bigger than LRM5 by a relative decrease in applied damage because of bad spread.
E.g.: 14 from 15 missiles hit when using LRM5, 12 of 15 missiles hit when using LRM15 due to spread.
You can cheese around that with the LRM5 cat. Sound like you outsmarted a dumb game mechanism there.

Now imagine the stagger to be at 0,12 seconds each and not 0,5 chainfire value. With an LRM5 spread. Not a lot to change here game-wise, not a killerswarm but more focused damage for bigger launchers and a little more susceptibility to AMS. Not a nerf at all to me.

As i said, i did not make the tables, but the idea of stagger-fired LRMs seems enchanting, because it fundamentally changes the mechanic. This way a 2xLRM20 cat should not any more be significantly worse off than an LRM5 A1.
And that the LRM5 cat still is a little bit better than a 2xLRM15 cat is fair i think. You ARE using ALL your hardpoints here for the hardcore missile build. No flexibility at all (and no TAG) for some more damage. Sound fair.

[Sheraf]

AMS works well now, if the other team pack together their AMS. AMS + the cover will give LRM only mech a problem

[Tombstoner]

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.

And yet how many rim styles exist and now we have run flat systems and extra thin tires.

LRMS need some rework. i personally would like to see the SSRM hit location system applied to LRMs during the last phase of the flight path and once allocated given a boost in speed so they hit super fast. seeing a light running from a swarm that's traveling almost horizontal is silly.

IF PGI can add mistery heat to weapons for balance reasons they can add 2 stage motors to LRM'S

[Mawai]

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.

No. I don't see much of a problem.

LRMs do not require line of sight to fire. A mech using LRMs can be invulnerable to its target ... all it needs is a spotter.
LRMs do not need to be aimed.

An ERPPC firing at 800m has to be able to track its moving target and actually hit it. The odds of hitting one particular mech section at that range are almost zero. The odds of even hitting a moving target can be even smaller.

An LRM at 800m firing at a moving target it can not even see will hit that target 100% of the time unless it has moved to cover.

Trying to compare LRM to PPC in terms of direct balance makes no sense.

On the other hand, LRMs may need some additional tweaking since the grouping of missiles does not seem consistent between different launcher types as reported by the OP.

[Sheraf]

The spotter tends to short live against a good group of mech

[MaddMaxx]

Sheraf, on 17 July 2013 - 05:56 AM, said:

AMS works well now, if the other team pack together their AMS. AMS + the cover will give LRM only mech a problem

And once again the LRM5 is the answer. If you locate a Lance, say, that are all carrying AMS. If you have 4 x LRM5's, or more, then Chain firing them, or even just lobbing them at that Lance in a staggered pattern, would active ALL the AMS's on ALL those Mechs and before 3 minutes passes, they would all be out of the 1 ton most carry for the Launcher.

Now, with that issue out of the way, "Launch em ALL!" and start tearing **** up.

Maths is all good, but actual "thought" works way better when on the field of Battle. LOL

[Sheraf]

But will your spotter or you survive during that time?

[Reptilizer]

Mawai, on 17 July 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

An ERPPC firing at 800m has to be able to track its moving target and actually hit it. The odds of hitting one particular mech section at that range are almost zero. The odds of even hitting a moving target can be even smaller.

An LRM at 800m firing at a moving target it can not even see will hit that target 100% of the time unless it has moved to cover.

No quite. I know how you meant it, but you are actually ALWAYS hitting a particular mech section with full damage. Hitting the mech section you wanted has also a quite high probability, depending on the hitbox size and target orientation. I would guess except for the head it is never below much than 10%.

LRMs on the other hand nearly always hit the mech section you wanted, but NEVER with full damage.

And while you might be right that it makes little sense to compare the two weapon systems directly, they still have to be balanced against each other.

[Kitane]

Mawai, on 17 July 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

An ERPPC firing at 800m has to be able to track its moving target and actually hit it. The odds of hitting one particular mech section at that range are almost zero. The odds of even hitting a moving target can be even smaller.

An LRM at 800m firing at a moving target it can not even see will hit that target 100% of the time unless it has moved to cover.

...

For a LRM missile to hit with 100% accuracy at 800m, the target must be standing still. And I don't think it's that difficult to hit an immobile mech at 800m with ER PPC, or even aim at component of your choice.

LRMs suffer from massive undocumented loss of damage against moving targets.

[Novakaine]

Damn the secret is out.

[Unbound Inferno]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 July 2013 - 05:39 AM, said:

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.

Relatively speaking.

The 'bufff' is marginal, only relaly helping Catapults, Awesomes and I think DDC Atlas which have 15-tubes. But it brings them in line to be competetive with Stalkers, Trebs and Hunchies with the 10-tube.

Besides, admit it - they need some light nerf, and having AMS marginally better can't be a bad thing. Realistically speaking most boats will still have enough missiles incoming to overwhelm a single or double AMS screen. But it'll help if there was 4+ there, until they waste their ammo.

Then its back to that relative balancing act of having LRMs good again.

[Unbound Inferno]

Mawai, on 17 July 2013 - 06:07 AM, said:

No. I don't see much of a problem.

LRMs do not require line of sight to fire. A mech using LRMs can be invulnerable to its target ... all it needs is a spotter.
LRMs do not need to be aimed.

An ERPPC firing at 800m has to be able to track its moving target and actually hit it. The odds of hitting one particular mech section at that range are almost zero. The odds of even hitting a moving target can be even smaller.

An LRM at 800m firing at a moving target it can not even see will hit that target 100% of the time unless it has moved to cover.

Trying to compare LRM to PPC in terms of direct balance makes no sense.

On the other hand, LRMs may need some additional tweaking since the grouping of missiles does not seem consistent between different launcher types as reported by the OP.

A LRM is harder than twitchfest PPC.

The target must be locked. The launcher must be aimed at and locked on the target for the duration (or at least the last 1/4 travel) to the target. The launcher is vunlenerable to either the target or another that it can't do much abbout if there is a chance there. LRMs are limited by not being able to shift too much and their field of view is limited by the target.

No, LRMs are alot harder to use, easier to exploit (180m min range) and with ECM completely possible to lock out most locks and nearly any indirect locks.


Sorry, but that's the facts.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 09:57 AM, said:

Besides, admit it - they need some light nerf,

No, PGI needs to get rid of ECM before any more LRM changes can be done.

Or at the very least change ECM into what it was in tabletop, blocking things like NARC and Artemis.

What it does now makes it impossible to balance LRM's properly.

And where they are at now is about as good as it's going to get until ECM is changed.

[Sephlock]

TOGSolid, on 04 July 2013 - 12:16 PM, said:

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.

You deserve a medal for that description. Sir, I salute you.

[Unbound Inferno]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 July 2013 - 10:09 AM, said:

No, PGI needs to get rid of ECM before any more LRM changes can be done.

Or at the very least change ECM into what it was in tabletop, blocking things like NARC and Artemis.

What it does now makes it impossible to balance LRM's properly.

And where they are at now is about as good as it's going to get until ECM is changed.

Horrendously overpowered or off?

No thanks. I want balanced. I agree on the ECM, I even wrote up on how it should work;
http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

But its up to PGI to listen.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Unbound Inferno, on 17 July 2013 - 10:15 AM, said:

Horrendously overpowered or off?

No thanks. I want balanced. I agree on the ECM, I even wrote up on how it should work;
http://mwomercs.com/...__fromsearch__1

But its up to PGI to listen.

What is horrendously overpowered? LRM's?

Please tell me I am misreading that.

[Unbound Inferno]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 July 2013 - 10:56 AM, said:

What is horrendously overpowered? LRM's?

Please tell me I am misreading that.

You are missing that.

A 4x LRM-10 2x LRM5 on an A1 Cat can core an Atlas in 3 or 4 volleys with someone having TAG on it.
A 4x LRM-10 C4 with TAG takes 4-5 volleys. Which is still pretty fast.

All I am suggest is a spread increase that ups the volley requirement by 1, and makes AMS viable for defense.

I have been piloting my 6x LRM-5 A-1 the last week and I am consistently getting 2-4 kills per match, and dying in less than half of them (typically the matches my side looses) so its pretty good for something with absolutely no defense under 180m.

Edited by Unbound Inferno, 17 July 2013 - 11:00 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

So you are saying LRM's are horrendously overpowered?

Well you have suddenly become not worth my time to talk too.

[Unbound Inferno]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 17 July 2013 - 11:03 AM, said:

So you are saying LRM's are horrendously overpowered?

Well you have suddenly become not worth my time to talk too.

In the aspect of the current boating, yes. A Stalker's LRM80 is a massive advantage taking only 2-3 shots to CT core something in the open. It shouldn't be that fast.

Why would you argue that it isn't? The ECM on'off switch? That need changing, but that's hardly a crutch of an excuse to justify it being too CT damage and partial to LRM10 tubes over any other mech.


I think you are misinterpreting the fine line I want to walk. I want them powerful, just not that powerful. A bit of a curb and its perfect I think, balance the launchers so any of them are viable and we're set.

We aren't that far off, but the current layout really limits the Catapult and Awesome far more than it should.