71 replies to this topic

[Unbound Inferno]

Explain this to me...

Paul's heat scale...

LRM-20 x2 = 40
LRM-15 x2 = 30
LRM-10 x2 = 20
I really hoped it was a typo and was going to be fixed by the patch, but I guess not..

LRM-5 isn't restricted, but the best is on an A1 for 6, meaning 30 launched, not so bad...

Then there is the linking...

LRM-20+15=35
LRM-20+10=30
LRM-15+10=25
LRM-10+10=20


Why is a LRM20 so dangerous to be in this kind of a mess? I can't understand why the limit is a LRM40 or less... but this is just stupid - especially when missile spreads make the dual LRM-20 out of a Catapult weak as hell.. It forces chain-fire on the LRM10s into an easily shootable pattern, rendering the Catapult line even further behind in piratical support uselessness.

Even accounting hardpoint restrictions the only mech that ever makes the LRM10s dangerous is the A1 with 6x for LRM60, and that's sacrificing ammo due to its size, even then its still behind the typical LRM80-100 Stalker from the tube launching patterns. Even the Awesome deals and handles better as a LRM boat than that being more durable with more shots. Also Assaults can boat enough Lasers as backup with Missiles and ammo making the Catapult's only versatility with JJs a token thought in the confines of MW:O fighting grounds.

Goodbye Catapult C4. Back to the shelf with you as the Dual LRM20s are useless wastes of ammo still.


I'm pretty much limited to my A1 now if I want to run a Catapult and feel like I am dealing damage with LRMs or SRMs, unless I turn the C1 into a PPC runner - since LRM15s or LRM20s are woefully lacking in actually dealing damage.


So, an explanation PGI? Maybe a fix? Cause right now the C4 can't use the 4x LRM10 style in a sustained fire without shredding itself on AMS rendering it useless again since every shot counts with almost no backup weapons.

Great patch nerfing an already vulnerable chassis that can't use PPCs, Gauss or AC20 well.

Edited by Unbound Inferno, 30 July 2013 - 01:55 PM.

[FupDup]

Well, you can maybe fit your C4 with 2 LRM 15 and 2 LRM 5 for the same total number of missiles for 2 tons less weight (but with slightly different cooldowns).


But yes, I agree that it's pretty stupid; especially seeing how the SRM2 has a max alpha but the LRM5 doesn't. DAFUQ?!!!

Edited by FupDup, 30 July 2013 - 01:53 PM.

[xDeityx]

Hopefully this illustrates to the people defending this horrible system how poorly it was thought out.

[Braggart]

xDeityx, on 30 July 2013 - 01:43 PM, said:

Hopefully this illustrates to the people defending this horrible system how poorly it was thought out.

It doesnt. The system is fine.

LET ME DUMB IT DOWN FOR EVERYONE.

FIRE YOUR MISSILES IN 2 SEPERATE GROUPS AND YOU WILL INCUR NO HEAT PENALTY. ALL YOU NEED IS .5 SECONDS INBETWEEN VOLLEYS, AND YOU WILL GET NO HEAT PENALTY.

YOU CAN RUN THE EXACT SAME LOADOUTS AS BEFORE THE HEAT PENALTIES CAME, YOU SIMPLY ALTER HOW YOU FIRE, YOU DONT FIRE 1 BLOB, YOU FIRE 2 SMALLER BLOBS .5 SECONDS APART FROM EACH OTHER.

also. these changes were a buff to things like the lrm20. people would take the smaller launchers and take multiples because of the quicker recharge. Now we have a reason to take the heavier like the lrm20. Otherwise play as normal.

Edited by Braggart, 30 July 2013 - 02:03 PM.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

One time at band camp, I chain fired my LRMs.

I lie. I've never been to band camp.

Or put more than 2 LRMs on a mech.

[Unbound Inferno]

Braggart, on 30 July 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

It doesnt. The system is fine.

LET ME DUMB IT DOWN FOR EVERYONE.

FIRE YOUR MISSILES IN 2 SEPERATE GROUPS AND YOU WILL INCUR NO HEAT PENALTY. ALL YOU NEED IS .5 SECONDS INBETWEEN VOLLEYS, AND YOU WILL GET NO HEAT PENALTY.

YOU CAN RUN THE EXACT SAME LOADOUTS AS BEFORE THE HEAT PENALTIES CAME, YOU SIMPLY ALTER HOW YOU FIRE, YOU DONT FIRE 1 BLOB, YOU FIRE 2 SMALLER BLOBS .5 SECONDS APART FROM EACH OTHER.

also. these changes were a buff to things like the lrm20. people would take the smaller launchers and take multiples because of the quicker recharge. Now we have a reason to take the heavier like the lrm20. Otherwise play as normal.

Let me try to dumb this down for you.... VOLLEY FIRE TO BREAK AMS FOR A GOOD HIT

Catapults can't do that with anything other than a LRM-15 or LRM-20 dual to ensure there is a decent ammount landing to deal damage. But a LRM-10 dual? That's only half that, and even less landing.

Oh, but your counter - chain fire.... yeah.... I just wasted two volleys cause AMS screwed me over. GG, really. I don't mean it.

The whole idea, the one thing Catapults (specifically the C4) had over Stalkers was the larger single-volley shot that broke AMS easily. It was one of the few redeeming factors.

Now? The only one left that does that with enough damage (thanks to ****** missile spread for the LRM20 from the C4) is the the A1. SPECIALIZING IN LRM ONE TO DO IT. Yeah, that really makes me want to play the same run and keep my distance game when a single light can overpower me thanks to completely oversized mech hitbox arms. Yeah no.


This game's being catered for the 'competitive player' by only letting the PPC/Gauss/AC20 be the ONLY build that works.
And I'm getting sick of that.

[Orzorn]

Braggart, on 30 July 2013 - 01:59 PM, said:

It doesnt. The system is fine.

LET ME DUMB IT DOWN FOR EVERYONE.

FIRE YOUR MISSILES IN 2 SEPERATE GROUPS AND YOU WILL INCUR NO HEAT PENALTY. ALL YOU NEED IS .5 SECONDS INBETWEEN VOLLEYS, AND YOU WILL GET NO HEAT PENALTY.

YOU CAN RUN THE EXACT SAME LOADOUTS AS BEFORE THE HEAT PENALTIES CAME, YOU SIMPLY ALTER HOW YOU FIRE, YOU DONT FIRE 1 BLOB, YOU FIRE 2 SMALLER BLOBS .5 SECONDS APART FROM EACH OTHER.

also. these changes were a buff to things like the lrm20. people would take the smaller launchers and take multiples because of the quicker recharge. Now we have a reason to take the heavier like the lrm20. Otherwise play as normal.

Wait, what? LRM 10s were crap before anyways, because LRM 15s had the best ratios.

Why is it SO BAD for LRM 10s to deal roughly 20 damage, but LRM 15s are allowed 30, and LRM 20s allowed 40?

PGI is being inconsistent with their system. I hate the system, but god, if they're going to keep using it, they might as well be consistent.

[Deathlike]

Unbound Inferno, on 30 July 2013 - 03:16 PM, said:

This game's being catered for the 'competitive player' by only letting the PPC/Gauss/AC20 be the ONLY build that works.
And I'm getting sick of that.

I don't think the competitive played wanted that.. even though the random LRMs of mass destruction were cool once in a blue moon.

I apologize if we wanted LRMs to go away. We just want occasionally easy targets to poke at.

[FupDup]

Unbound Inferno, on 30 July 2013 - 03:16 PM, said:

This game's being catered for the 'competitive player' by only letting the PPC/Gauss/AC20 be the ONLY build that works.

Actually, it's the other way around. Most competitive players see LRMs as either fine or even slightly ineffective, and would therefore keep them the same or buff them.

The only people who think LRMs are too good are underhivers. The heat scale (experienced players can get around it) and Paul's ATD #43 response about the heat threshold (he's afraid of players who have knowledge of the mechlab) show us that this game is being balanced for the LCD (lowest common denominator).

Edited by FupDup, 30 July 2013 - 03:30 PM.

[Orzorn]

FupDup, on 30 July 2013 - 03:27 PM, said:

Actually, it's the other way around. Most competitive players see LRMs as either fine or even slightly ineffective, and would therefore keep them the same or buff them. The only people who think LRMs are too good are underhivers. The heat scale and Paul's ATD #43 response about the heat threshold show us that this game is being balanced for the LCD.

I rarely, if ever, see LRMs in competitive play. They're okay in pubs, but I still don't see much a place of them in competitive, that's for sure.

Maybe when 12s come along.

Regardless of all that phooey, PGI should be consistent with their systems.

As an address at Unbound Inferno, I'd say its the opposite, but not in the way FupDup put it. PGI is "catering" to the PPC/Gauss/AC20 meta by being generally incompetent with their systems and not attacking the problems effectively. We told them that his heat system would cause problems, and now we're seeing them. PPCs are still hands down the most awesome weapon in the game right now, and no level of heat penalty will make them not awesome. The only way that'll happen is if their heat goes up, but EVEN with that, as long as we have massive heat caps, you can just fire them to your heart's content.

It seems that by attempting to attack high alpha, PGI has helped it out.

Edited by Orzorn, 30 July 2013 - 03:32 PM.

[Unbound Inferno]

FupDup, on 30 July 2013 - 03:27 PM, said:

Actually, it's the other way around. Most competitive players see LRMs as either fine or even slightly ineffective, and would therefore keep them the same or buff them.

The only people who think LRMs are too good are underhivers. The heat scale (experienced players can get around it) and Paul's ATD #43 response about the heat threshold (he's afraid of players who have knowledge of the mechlab) show us that this game is being balanced for the LCD (lowest common denominator).

Interesting perception of it.

The way I see it the competitive players don't want LRMs buffed because that'll mean they can't snipe well as PUGs would be able to operate easier, where anymore of a nerf cuts the 'teamplay' edge from using massive LRM boats.Much the same about the ECm problems as that actually caters to those direct-fire over LRMs currently.

In the meantime, all I see is Paul has no real idea on how the heat system, mech construction - let alone the old Battletech rules work. The heat penalties introduced and the reluctance to make use of higher dissipation (or more effective ones) to alleviate stress proves that as he just can't seem to grasp how better dissipation is a good thing.

Instead the game is geared for, and operates around alphastrikes thanks to higher threshold without penalties allowing it.

But its not through design, but rather dumb luck. And they just can't admit that.

Its really stupid in my view.

Orzorn, on 30 July 2013 - 03:31 PM, said:

It seems that by attempting to attack high alpha, PGI has helped it out.

Another view pointing out that dumb luck part.

[FupDup]

Unbound Inferno, on 30 July 2013 - 03:43 PM, said:

Interesting perception of it.

The way I see it the competitive players don't want LRMs buffed because that'll mean they can't snipe well as PUGs would be able to operate easier, where anymore of a nerf cuts the 'teamplay' edge from using massive LRM boats.Much the same about the ECm problems as that actually caters to those direct-fire over LRMs currently.

It depends on the type of person, not the level of play (casual versus comp). Only douchenozzle comp players want the meta to stay the same. There are also some douchenozzle casuals out there who would like their favorite weapons to stay on top forever. The majority of comps and casuals, however, are not douchenozzles. The majority of both groups WANT changes and WANT more viable weapons--including LRMs (although many casuals tend to believe that LRMs are OP because they don't know how to use cover to full effect).

Unbound Inferno, on 30 July 2013 - 03:43 PM, said:

In the meantime, all I see is Paul has no real idea on how the heat system, mech construction - let alone the old Battletech rules work. The heat penalties introduced and the reluctance to make use of higher dissipation (or more effective ones) to alleviate stress proves that as he just can't seem to grasp how better dissipation is a good thing.

Instead the game is geared for, and operates around alphastrikes thanks to higher threshold without penalties allowing it.

But its not through design, but rather dumb luck. And they just can't admit that.

Its really stupid in my view.

It's all because Paul is afraid of people who have knowledge of how to use the mechlab. He doesn't want people who know how to build robots to be able to sustain damage output over time. He'd much rather have them boat and alpha all day. Evidence:

miSs, on 26 July 2013 - 12:35 PM, said:

Answer from Paul: There are no current plans to change the heat threshold towards TT values. Are we hard set against it? No, just at the moment there’s no need to do this.

Playing with a higher rate of cooling makes a lot more builds become heat neutral. A lot of heat neutral builds results in mid-range damage applied at a constant rate over time. This mechanism would be highly exploited by those with knowledge of building efficient heat neutral Mechs.

Edited by FupDup, 30 July 2013 - 03:55 PM.

[Unbound Inferno]

Yeah? and that's what we want - but without it we get this PPC meta we hate. Go figure.

Well, if they want to ruin the game, they are doing a great job.

[Braggart]

Unbound Inferno, on 30 July 2013 - 03:16 PM, said:

Let me try to dumb this down for you.... VOLLEY FIRE TO BREAK AMS FOR A GOOD HIT

Catapults can't do that with anything other than a LRM-15 or LRM-20 dual to ensure there is a decent ammount landing to deal damage. But a LRM-10 dual? That's only half that, and even less landing.

Oh, but your counter - chain fire.... yeah.... I just wasted two volleys cause AMS screwed me over. GG, really. I don't mean it.

The whole idea, the one thing Catapults (specifically the C4) had over Stalkers was the larger single-volley shot that broke AMS easily. It was one of the few redeeming factors.

Now? The only one left that does that with enough damage (thanks to ****** missile spread for the LRM20 from the C4) is the the A1. SPECIALIZING IN LRM ONE TO DO IT. Yeah, that really makes me want to play the same run and keep my distance game when a single light can overpower me thanks to completely oversized mech hitbox arms. Yeah no.


This game's being catered for the 'competitive player' by only letting the PPC/Gauss/AC20 be the ONLY build that works.
And I'm getting sick of that.

you have no idea what chain fire is. Because it is not what i suggested.

[FerrolupisXIII]

so, am i the only one that feels like the "typical" LRM-80 to 100 stalker is a total lie?

i've run the LRM-100 stalker. its a horrible horrible idea.

LRM 80 isnt far behind.

LRM-60 is competitive, but you MUST have friends that cover you, because you really wont have the close range weapons to be a real threat.

Other than that, i run 2x LRM 15 and 2x LRM 20 catapults all the time, and i do fairly well most matches. i dont know how you play, but i communicate with the brawlers and stay 500-600 meters behind them and just get on their target. or on our scouts target. also makes for decent suppression fire on Sniper builds. no one wants to eat 30-40 LRM's if they can avoid it. and it isnt a huge waste like on other LRM mechs.

so, i really dont see the problem. AMS really isnt as big a problem as you make it seem like, unless there are multiple Dual AMS mechs next to each other. as others said, you can still run 4x LRM 15, you just have to stagger the fire pattern.

also, my thought is to run 2x LRM 20's and 2x LRM 5's on a Stalker 3H. fires one 50 shot blob of LRM's. seems legit to me.

Also, what is your problem with the spread pattern on 20 boxes? there are only a handful of mechs even capable of launching a full 20 volley at once. i find it handy for getting a mass cloud that you seem to be such a big fan of.

seeing as this thread is already full of angry responses and name calling, i'll say now that i mean no offense, nor do i think you're a noob. just curious on your train of thought

[Unbound Inferno]

Braggart, on 31 July 2013 - 07:26 AM, said:

you have no idea what chain fire is.  Because it is not what i suggested.

2 Groups of LRM-10, both Chain Fire. Pull both Triggers to get two separate LRm-20 shots chewn up by AMS.

yeah, I know what you are talking about.

If you are talking about 4x LRM-10s Chain Fired, that is just dumb. Hits won't land well until AMS is gone.

Edited by Unbound Inferno, 31 July 2013 - 12:06 PM.

[Bilbo]

Unbound Inferno, on 31 July 2013 - 12:05 PM, said:

2 Groups of LRM-10, both Chain Fire. Pull both Triggers to get two separate LRm-20 shots chewn up by AMS.

yeah, I know what you are talking about.

If you are talking about 4x LRM-10s Chain Fired, that is just dumb. Hits won't land well until AMS is gone.

AMS is not nearly as effective as you make it out to be.

[Frisk]

I think a discussion regarding chassis tweaks/perks and weapon system heat management might be warranted.

[Unbound Inferno]

FerrolupisXIII, on 31 July 2013 - 11:59 AM, said:

so, am i the only one that feels like the "typical" LRM-80 to 100 stalker is a total lie?

i've run the LRM-100 stalker. its a horrible horrible idea.

LRM 80 isnt far behind.

LRM-60 is competitive, but you MUST have friends that cover you, because you really wont have the close range weapons to be a real threat.

Other than that, i run 2x LRM 15 and 2x LRM 20 catapults all the time, and i do fairly well most matches. i dont know how you play, but i communicate with the brawlers and stay 500-600 meters behind them and just get on their target. or on our scouts target. also makes for decent suppression fire on Sniper builds. no one wants to eat 30-40 LRM's if they can avoid it. and it isnt a huge waste like on other LRM mechs.

so, i really dont see the problem. AMS really isnt as big a problem as you make it seem like, unless there are multiple Dual AMS mechs next to each other. as others said, you can still run 4x LRM 15, you just have to stagger the fire pattern.

also, my thought is to run 2x LRM 20's and 2x LRM 5's on a Stalker 3H. fires one 50 shot blob of LRM's. seems legit to me.

Also, what is your problem with the spread pattern on 20 boxes? there are only a handful of mechs even capable of launching a full 20 volley at once. i find it handy for getting a mass cloud that you seem to be such a big fan of.

seeing as this thread is already full of angry responses and name calling, i'll say now that i mean no offense, nor do i think you're a noob. just curious on your train of thought

"noob" is a subjective demaning point of view. I may have only been here a few months, but I am experienced in gaming - I just don't like the 'competitive' atmosphere of what I witness here calling others names. Sure I don't team myself, but I haven't seen a team/clan/group worth joining here yet. The vocal ones on the forums more often than not are the only ones calling out and tossing those names, while the quiet don't ask - and I don't care to seek them out anymore.

"Good" is also subjective. How much ammo? How frequently do you fire? Kill/Death Ratio quality (helps you have coordinated teammates) good or just figuring the time spent for a win/loss? You run with buddies, does someone always have TAG on the target? And you mention communication - I am worried on the key core of the gaming community here, not the teams, and face it - I believe most PUG. PUG is horrible, I know, but doable and that needs a different edge with situations in consideration where you can't rely on teamwork to save your butt.

So yeah, I know how to. Can it be done? Not easily with Team groups coordinating against random PUGs really skewering the opportunities, and then the ECM shtick.


Also, if you can't get WHY the LRM-20 Spread from a C4 is bad, then I suggest you try running numbers. How much of the real important CT damage is done per shots fired is pathetic compared to ammo used as opposed to other launchers. The spread is so big a sizable amount misses even Heavies. unless there is TAG on it The relative CT damage is also a pain as it really isn't worth denting the rest of the mech for so few shots per ton ammo when you can't aim shots or guarantee enough to actually do anything.

For Missiles, it targets CT. Its how the mechanic works - the rest of the damage is not as important as it likely won't kill or be enough to really harm a mech.
The LRM-10, LRM-15 and LRM-20 all deal the same relative CT damage on most medium and average sized mechs. The LRM-5 when boated is higher CT however.
Only on larger Heavies and Assaults does the larger CT allow the LRM-15 and LRM-20 up the damage there if you hit head-on.
The LRM-15 averages out better for "total damage" but the majority of it is superficial on the rest of the Mech.
A full LRM-20 doesn't compare any better or worse damage-wise, but its an ineffective use of ammo as some missiles miss completely.

The result is the LRM-20 has the least number of shots for such a comparatively limited edge in damage per shot fired its a waste compared to more efficient launchers like the LRM-10 or even the LRM-15. The LRM-20 is a waste of ammo and space for its slower recharge and possible damage doable over time.

The Quad-LRM-10 setup allowed for far more damage, far quicker than the Dual-LRM-20 ever could do. That is why it remains better But the heat makes it so ineffective only being able to fire a few salvos before needing to wait, and on a hot map it makes it even worse and nearly impossible DPS to kill anything with its own weapons.


But I take it you mainly team? Good is a natural part of teamwork with help. I don't care to factor that in determining if anything can be good - as good teamwork can make some crappy weapons impressive with a little bit of coordination.

[TexAce]

Great, now that you pointed that out, every other game in the world will laugh at us and our "balance".

I can't take this serious anymore.