230 replies to this topic

[Wolfways]

Kuritaclan, on 29 September 2013 - 09:17 PM, said:

range?

LRM's have 1000m max range.
AC20 has 810m max range.

The AC does less damage the further the target.
LRM's never do full damage at any range

Edited by Wolfways, 29 September 2013 - 10:56 PM.

[Kuritaclan]

Wolfways, on 29 September 2013 - 10:56 PM, said:

LRM's have 1000m max range.
AC20 has 810m max range.

The AC does less damage the further the target.
LRM's never do full damage at any range

You really compare AC20 at >>810<< meters with LRM's. Good joke.

[MustrumRidcully]

Kuritaclan, on 30 September 2013 - 01:12 AM, said:

You really compare AC20 at >>810<< meters with LRM's. Good joke.

Well, you started with the joking. Comparing a pinpoint damage weapon with one that scatters its damage all over the mech.

Comparing those two weapons isn't exactly the easiest thing to do, and just picking one variable and comparing them tells you approximately nothing.

---

But if we want to compare some values:

My AC/20 accuracy sits at 63.29 % (> 5.000 shots), my LRM 15 accuracy at 33.12 % (> 15.000 shots)
My ER PPC accuracy sits at 57.69 % (> 500 shots) and my Gauss at 59.78 % (> 3.000 shots)
(The accuracy ratings are nothing to write home about, just to compare the relations.)

That's just shots hit vs shots missed, it doesn't tell us whether these shots hit the location I was aiming for.

Edited by MustrumRidcully, 30 September 2013 - 01:30 AM.

[Kuritaclan]

MustrumRidcully, on 30 September 2013 - 01:24 AM, said:

Well, you started with the joking. Comparing a pinpoint damage weapon with one that scatters its damage all over the mech.

Wolfways start the joke, Comparing both weapons.

MustrumRidcully, on 30 September 2013 - 01:24 AM, said:

My AC/20 accuracy sits at 63.29 % (> 5.000 shots), my LRM 15 accuracy at 33.12 % (> 15.000 shots)

All what it tells is that you were near enough to hit your target with the AC20! Those accuracy stats tell nothing. Those "high" numbers come out of close combat range. Somewhat less likely than 300m. You won't hit a target beyond 500m with an AC20 what strafe and move and or torso twist. Beside of that you have to invest a heavy tonnage for it. An AC20 alone weight as much as LRM20 with 720 missels.

The arrangement what was setup to make a point isn't in any manner meaning full.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 30 September 2013 - 01:53 AM.

[Wolfways]

Kuritaclan, on 30 September 2013 - 01:46 AM, said:

Wolfways start the joke, Comparing both weapons.

I think you'll find i only compared the weight of the weapons.
Then you brought up range, and i showed the difference that range makes for those weapons.

And just because you can't hit a target over 500m away with an AC20 doesn't mean you should assume nobody can.

[MustrumRidcully]

Kuritaclan, on 30 September 2013 - 01:46 AM, said:

Wolfways start the joke, Comparing both weapons.

That's why I also gave you the Gauss and ER PPC stats.

[Kuritaclan]

Wolfways, on 30 September 2013 - 02:10 AM, said:

I think you'll find i only compared the weight of the weapons.
Then you brought up range, and i showed the difference that range makes for those weapons.

And just because you can't hit a target over 500m away with an AC20 doesn't mean you should assume nobody can.

MustrumRidcully, on 30 September 2013 - 02:14 AM, said:

That's why I also gave you the Gauss and ER PPC stats.

Comparing Ac20/PCC/Gauss with LRM... Never saw a PPC or Gauss Shot went through/over objects. Even if the Range is comparable you can't compare the mechanic and therefor accuracy. I'm out of this trashtalk.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 30 September 2013 - 02:54 AM.

[Lightfoot]

In MechWarrior 3 LRMs appeared on your radar so you could attempt to dodge them. Zipper Interactive did a good job there.

LRMs are pure support now, but can also be effective as a secondary weapon to soften up targets for your direct-fire weapons. That might be all that MWO will support since anytime LRMs start to be competitive with direct-fire they get abused and nerfed.

And, yes, the fact that virtually no LRMs were used in the NGNG Launch Event games that were streamed is very telling of just how uncompetitive LRMs are now. Just bring Medium Lasers and an AC to any map and it's WIN. LRMs should be powerful on open maps and the players in the Launch Event even had the knowledge of what Map they were going to and still no one took LRMs. That is very telling right there of how over-nerfed MWO's LRMs are.

[Wolfways]

How about this for a comparison then? LRM20 vs. LB 10-X AC.

The AC weighs 11 tons and takes 6 crit slots. The LRM20 weighs 10 tons and takes 5 crit slots.
The LRM wins slightly there.

The AC does up to 10 damage (10 projectiles at 1.0 damage each) and the LRM20 does up to 22 damage (20 projectiles at 1.10 damage each), but the cooldown time of the AC is 2.50 and the LRM is 4.75 so the AC fires almost twice as fast as the LRM.
I'd say that fairly evens them out.

Heat? AC is 2 heat/shot, but as it fires almost twice as fast let's say 4 heat. LRM20 is 6 heat/shot, and also triggers ghost heat if you fire 3 or more of any of the following linked weapons: LRM20, LRM15, LRM10.
Clear win for the AC there.

The max range of the AC is 1,620 and the max range of the LRM is 1000.
The AC loses damage over distance while the LRM doesn't. The LRM also has a minimum range of 180 though so is useless in close quarter fights while the AC does better in close quarter fights due to the projectiles hitting in a tighter group.
The AC is clearly better up close while the LRM is better for range, even if the range is shorter.

Ammo/ton.
15 for the AC, although each shot is actually 10 individual projectiles so it's really 150/ton.
The LRM20 gets 180/ton.
The LRM has the advantage there.

So far they seem pretty close...

Speed.
The LB 10-X AC shot travels at 1,100. The LRM missiles travel at the grand speed of 120.
Try dodging a well aimed AC shot. A very clear win for the AC.


So, advantages and disadvantages of the weapons.

The LB 10-X AC is a direct fire weapon that shoots projectiles at massive speed, and you only need to expose yourself for a second.

The LRM20 can be used to fire direct well (depending on opinion) if you add TAG (1 ton and 1 crit slot, bringing it up to the weight and crit slots of the AC) and Artemis (1 ton/launcher).
It can also be fired indirect if your spotter keeps the enemy targeted, if there aren't too many AMS on the missiles flight path, if the enemy don't have ECM (unless your spotter also has TAG and can keep it on the enemy), if the enemy doesn't have the sense to run fast and then shutdown (causing the missiles to lose lock and track to the place just before the enemy mech shutdown), if the enemy don't hide behind cover, and if you manage to keep the lock on target for the whole lock-on and travel time while possibly coming under fire yourself and having to decide whether to lose the lock and waste the ammo to defend yourself or hold the lock until the missiles impact and hope you aren't dead by then. A lot of ifs there.
Oh, and their slow speed gives more time for any of the above to happen, and the target gets a huge visual and sound warning that there are incoming missiles.

Yeah, i think i know which is the better weapon by far.

[Wolfways]

Kuritaclan, on 30 September 2013 - 02:54 AM, said:

Never saw a PPC or Gauss Shot went through/over objects.

Just thought i should also mention that missiles don't go through cover. PGI explained that if you take missile damage after you get behind cover it is because HSR "see's" you get hit before you were in cover. It just shows up on your computer a little later so seems like you're getting hit while in cover, but you're actually not.

[Joseph Mallan]

Kuritaclan, on 30 September 2013 - 01:12 AM, said:

You really compare AC20 at >>810<< meters with LRM's. Good joke.

You do know that LRMs don't hit with all missiles even on a solid lock right? So Wolfways is correct. Comparing an AC20 to an LRM20 is not a apples to apples comparison. At no time in combat does an LRM or SRM get full damage per salvo! It was ever pretty rare on TT.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 30 September 2013 - 03:59 AM.

[Kuritaclan]

Very entertaining this comparing of apples to oranges. But just make more of them. It is a real fun to read so much sense free slobbering. Apparently 50 LRMsrack HGN-733 are absolutely harmless particularly you meet a pack in Alpine peak or caustic valley.

[Shlkt]

Quote

2) Nerf Incoming missile warning. Make it part of AMS module and restrict the maximum range it can detect incoming missiles to ~400m

I love the idea of a limited-range missile warning. Not sure I'd agree with the AMS-only restriction, but reduced warning time would make the weapon a lot more interesting. Observant pilots (or scouts on teamspeak) will still be able to see missiles in the air and take cover appropriately, so this is a suggestion which gives skilled players (and good scouts) another small advantage.

[Kuritaclan]

Shlkt, on 30 September 2013 - 05:05 AM, said:

I love the idea of a limited-range missile warning. Not sure I'd agree with the AMS-only restriction, but reduced warning time would make the weapon a lot more interesting. Observant pilots (or scouts on teamspeak) will still be able to see missiles in the air and take cover appropriately, so this is a suggestion which gives skilled players (and good scouts) another small advantage.

Mostly all big mechs have equiped an AMS. It it should better be restricted as a plus for the BAP, since this Equipment is an Activ Radar.

Edited by Kuritaclan, 30 September 2013 - 05:37 AM.

[C E Dwyer]

LRM's will never balance, they either become way to powerfull or sit somewhere around ok, -mediocre depending on how they're used.

lrms are a hybrid system in mwo they are not true, long range aoe, neither are they fully guided like a swingfire wire guided AT missle, which has a range of approxiamtely mwo lrms

I also think how people want to use them also colours the preception, which differs alot from what missiles (non-nuclear) actually are, which is a weapon to soften up the other side, its never been a decisive weapon, much like modern artillery, you can't win a battle with just missiles, and neither should it happen in MWO.

Now I use lrms on all my stalkers, all my cat expect k2 obviously, my awesomes with can carry, I have a few mixed with srm in my kints, I have them on two of my orions, 1 highlander, and I think an lrm20 on an atlas some have artemis. others not, one awesome has a tag,do they perform.

I get kills with them, they are sometimes frustrating the spotter loses lock and they slam into a rockface, I have good days and bad days with them.

I see them as a weapon to soften up the other team or suppress movement,and go in for the kill with other weapons mounted, from my perspective they work prefectly.

Buffing lrms is going to bring back stalkers highlanders, atali, with nothing but them,was teamed with an atalas with nothing but lrm40 only this week, and tag, and giving them a direct fire capability is going to make the xb10 pointless

[Magna Canus]

I like many of the idea's above, especially reduced travel time and limited range missile warning, but any other changes are not really viable without making LRMs OP again.

I dont use LRMs as a my sole weapon despite the fact that I have Artemis, BAP, and TAG equipped to make them even remotely useful. Usually I have a pair of LLAs as well which reduces the ammount of ammo I can carry, but that only supports "smart use" of munitions.

Basically my C1 is a support mech like any other ranged support build. I rarely fire missiles at anything outside of my TAG range and only follow up with LRMs after I have hit a target with LLAs + TAG which makes the wait to get lock a little less useless. This also helps make the most efficient use of the ammo you have making up for the reduced total ammo due to loading in LLAs.

Right now I would say that using LRMs without LOS + the whole TAG/BAP/Artemis suite is a waste of time. LRMs are too easy to dodge unless your Atlas is storming across open ground. Hitting lights is an epic task and hitting fast mediums is only slightly less difficult. I only use LRMs in my C1 and that only because I dont want to sell it or let it rust in the mech bay.

[SmokinDave73]

In my opinion I think what LRM's would benefit off the most is another small missle speed increase. You just have way to much time to move out of the way and get into cover. 5-10% at a time so they dont become way to fast is all it would take. Lights still out run LRM's to easily aswell.

[Praehotec8]

1.) LRMs are not useless currently, but they are not gratifying to use either. Their biggest use is area control and forcing enemy mechs to move from firing positions. This actually can win matches, but it's not really all that satisfying to use unless boated (see #2).

2.) LRMs can absolutely destroy mechs, but only in assault quantity loads. My LRM-60 stalker (even with ghost heat) can call down the wrath of the heavens, but my LRM-30 and below mechs rarely get kills from LRM firing.

I agree with some of the ideas presented in this thread, and I think that LRMs should have a longer lock-on time, and be fire-and-forget. They also need to move significantly faster. ECM should not totally prevent target lock. My A-1 flips it's missile flap at all of you who seem to feel all LRM mechs should be required to bring TAG.

Making missiles fire-and-forget would likely increase the utility of them more for those that don't exclusively boat LRMs (large missile boats can already kill targets exposed). It will be harder to dodge missiles just because you broke LOS with your attacker. It also would allow missile users to torso twist or more efficiently control enemy movement by allowing more enemies to be fired upon (rather than having to wait to guide the missiles to the enemy). Smart opposing team play would still be effective in mitigating the damage, however.

As to use in "competitive play"...well, competitive play is usually centered around skilled players who will do pretty much anything it takes to win. There will always be better and worse weapons in a game, and perhaps LRMs never will be....but not much of a loss IMO, as competitive play seems more about winning than entertainment, and most of us are here for fun.

As an aside, those of you (no names) who come into these balance threads and use the argument of, "I'm better than you, I'm a really good player, therefore your opinion is inferior to mine," not only sound arrogant and childish (even if you are an outstanding player), but it is foolish to assume that those who lack same level of playing ability do not understand the game mechanics, or could not have good ideas. It's rather like a navy SEAL telling a general he should not be commanding the strikes or how to organize an assault because the general cannot keep up with the SEAL on the ground (not that I know anything about the military). Ultimately, many of the gameplay ideas come down more to preference and playstyle coloring opinions, rather than raw skill.

[Wolfways]

Kuritaclan, on 30 September 2013 - 04:32 AM, said:

Very entertaining this comparing of apples to oranges. But just make more of them. It is a real fun to read so much sense free slobbering. Apparently 50 LRMsrack HGN-733 are absolutely harmless particularly you meet a pack in Alpine peak or caustic valley.

So LRM's are fine because you can go up against a team boating lots of them on one or two particular maps? Okay...

Edited by Wolfways, 30 September 2013 - 11:00 AM.

[Wolfways]

I just want to remind people that i didn't start this thread hoping to get LRM's buffed. The idea was to increase the effectiveness of direct fire and reduce the amount of indirect fire, as it seems to be indirect fire that bothers people the most.
I don't remember ever seeing someone say they think LRM's are OP because they went head to head with a Catapult and were instantly destroyed by LRM spam