57 replies to this topic

[Deathlike]

Warge, on 25 October 2013 - 12:52 PM, said:

Can you quote dev's words about it?

I'll look through the AtDs... I think there are references to it.

In any case, try it and you'll see that it works as I've described it.

Edit:

Source - http://mwomercs.com/...evs-36-answers/

AtD 36 said:

Metafox: SSRMs and LRMs appear to share the same locking function, even to the point where Artemis benefits both indiscriminately. Are there any plans to decouple the two systems and tweak them individually?
A: No plans at the moment.

In sum, working as intended™.

Edited by Deathlike, 25 October 2013 - 01:01 PM.

[Trauglodyte]

Maverick01, on 20 October 2013 - 07:33 PM, said:

LRM 5/10/15/20

• Projectile speed increased from 120 to 130 m/s

I wouldn't mind a bump in LRM speed. But what is honestly killing the LRM is really that they're slow AND they arc. The high arc makes sense when you're firing without a target in LOS (indirect fire). But, when I have a target in my sights, they should fire mostly flat to a point about 5-10m above the mech and then slam down (ie, hitting the top of the mech like modern day anti-tank missiles are designed). Essentially, you'd eliminate the arc almost 100% while keeping a little bit at the final point of flight. It would reduce the travel time and allow the LRM to be an effect open terrain weapon.

PS> I don't disagree with your other idea changes. Been talking about those changes for a long time.

Edited by Trauglodyte, 25 October 2013 - 01:03 PM.

[Warge]

Deathlike, on 25 October 2013 - 12:57 PM, said:

In sum, working as intended™.

I see... PGI-style. You should start you explanation with this words.

Trauglodyte, on 25 October 2013 - 01:02 PM, said:

But what is honestly killing the LRM is really that they're slow AND they arc.

But they still hit mostly CT.

[Deathlike]

Warge, on 25 October 2013 - 01:36 PM, said:

I see... PGI-style. You should start you explanation with this words.

I can't use it all the time... but it's only applicable if I use proof.

[Christof Romulus]

wintersborn, on 20 October 2013 - 07:57 PM, said:

BAP needs to counter ALL ECM's in range not just one.

Pffft! That's ridiculous! That would mean that ONE mech using ONE piece of equipment could shut down an entire grou...

Oh I see what you did there.

[Phoenix Branson]

Trauglodyte, on 25 October 2013 - 01:02 PM, said:

PS> I don't disagree with your other idea changes. Been talking about those changes for a long time.

I would rather PGI buff the underused weapons as opposed to nerfing the others.

[Kunae]

Really? No one saw this?

mike29tw, on 21 October 2013 - 06:57 PM, said:

Well this is what I fear would happen. ECM Spider jumps in, tag you with a NARC and dance around you with his amazing spider-armor, while you're being rained by LRM60 boats. Wouldn't want to be on the receiving end of that scenario.

Spiders don't have missile hardpoints.

[Deathlike]

Kunae, on 28 October 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

Really? No one saw this?

Spiders don't have missile hardpoints.

Maybe the mythical 6 MG Spider has expanded to missile hardpoints.

Imagine, 1 Energy, 2 Missile, 2 Ballistic. It would be named the Spider-5KO-TKO. It would be the best new Spider to troll other Locusts on the battlefield.

[Vodrin Thales]

Deathlike, on 25 October 2013 - 12:47 PM, said:

I'm not sure what you're asking but... yes?

It's been around, probably since the introduction of Artemis.

If you're not already spending the 750k to get the "free upgrade" to all Streaks, you're doing it wrong.

You are correct. Dev's never separated streak lock from LRM lock so anything that buffs LRM lock speed also works on streaks. This is a long standing bug present since the introduction of artemis close to a year ago now.

[Phoenix Branson]

Vodrin Thales, on 28 October 2013 - 01:49 PM, said:

You are correct. Dev's never separated streak lock from LRM lock so anything that buffs LRM lock speed also works on streaks. This is a long standing bug present since the introduction of artemis close to a year ago now.

Didn't know it was a bug, I thought it was intentional.

[Deathlike]

Maverick01, on 30 October 2013 - 06:20 PM, said:

Didn't know it was a bug, I thought it was intentional.

It's more or less the same, considering the source (PGI).

[pwnface]

I like the idea of buffing Narc to have an increased time of 60-90seconds and being able to provide a lock through ECM. Narc should also have a low percentage chance of being destroyed when hit and would be temporarily shut off when struck by PPCs in the same way ECM is temporarily shut off.

I also think Large Pulse Lasers need some major love. The increased tonnage/heat and decreased range make this weapon virtually non-existent on the battlefield. Buff LPLs to 11.5-12 damage and people will actually use them in brawler builds.

[Phoenix Branson]

pwnface, on 30 October 2013 - 07:26 PM, said:

I also think Large Pulse Lasers need some major love. The increased tonnage/heat and decreased range make this weapon virtually non-existent on the battlefield. Buff LPLs to 11.5-12 damage and people will actually use them in brawler builds.

Yes. Large Pulse Laser definitely need some love. I'm not sure how to fix them though.

[mike29tw]

Kunae, on 28 October 2013 - 01:26 PM, said:

Really? No one saw this?

Spiders don't have missile hardpoints.

LMAO it appears that I had no idea what I was talking about.

[Phoenix Branson]

mike29tw, on 01 November 2013 - 12:16 AM, said:

LMAO it appears that I had no idea what I was talking about.

Don't worry, it happens to the best of us!

[Almond Brown]

pwnface, on 30 October 2013 - 07:26 PM, said:

I like the idea of buffing Narc to have an increased time of 60-90seconds and being able to provide a lock through ECM. Narc should also have a low percentage chance of being destroyed when hit and would be temporarily shut off when struck by PPCs in the same way ECM is temporarily shut off.

I also think Large Pulse Lasers need some major love. The increased tonnage/heat and decreased range make this weapon virtually non-existent on the battlefield. Buff LPLs to 11.5-12 damage and people will actually use them in brawler builds.

At 12 pts they would be so abused. A STK-5M can carry 4 with a decent HE, even 5 with a crazy pilot, a Mastered chassis and some cool shots to boot. That would be an instant hit, single location, 60 pt Alpha. And since it is a Brawler, speed would not be a real concern... Hope you did not skimp on your Leg armor when these suckers get near. lol

Edited by Almond Brown, 01 November 2013 - 10:20 AM.

[Phoenix Branson]

Almond Brown, on 01 November 2013 - 10:18 AM, said:

At 12 pts they would be so abused. A STK-5M can carry 4 with a decent HE, even 5 with a crazy pilot, a Mastered chassis and some cool shots to boot. That would be an instant hit, single location, 60 pt Alpha. And since it is a Brawler, speed would not be a real concern... Hope you did not skimp on your Leg armor when these suckers get near. lol

I think there is a happy medium to make LPL viable but no OP.

[Karl Streiger]

Regarding the LPL - its biggest advantage was those silly -2 hit modificator. That in mind because we don't have something in MWO.

I would simple increase the range.
225m for MPLAS dmg increase to 6.2
375m for LPLAS dmg increase to 11

In this case the weapons have the same ratio towards the STD lasers like they have in TT