95 replies to this topic

[Karl Streiger]

Reptilizer, on 23 October 2013 - 05:34 AM, said:

Way better than me:

Weapon Matches Fired Hit Accuracy Time Equip. Damage
AC/20 170 1,584 1,089 68.75% 15:27:10 21,735
LRM 15 111 51,000 16,496 32.35% 10:51:53 17,448
LRM 20 52 17,988 4,929 27.40% 04:45:13 5,021

Just put the AC20 in for comparison having a similar damage potential (though i tend to snipe with it, hence the low total damage).
Also those values include a handful of LRMageddon matches.

Low damage for the AC 20? the dealt damage is 99% of the damage potential your 1089 shots can offer. While critical damage and even ammunition explosion - count towards that damage - it is likely that you deal less damage regarding damage only.

[Barantor]

As someone who uses LRMs to full effect, there are several things you can do to improve your chances to use it for higher damage.

In pugs, announce you are LRM heavy, everyone wants to win and might remember to target more effectively.

Know the map, goes for every loadout, but for LRMs it helps to know there is a mountain between you and the target that will soak up all the missiles.

Do not be afraid to direct fire. If a friendly is tanking the damage, get out there and direct fire those missiles so that they are clustered better with artemis and are doing their maximum damage.

Know when not to fire. You give your position away with indirect fire of LRMs, don't be the guy that ruins a flank by waving the big missile flag for the enemy scouts to come and investigate.

300m I call the "kill zone" this to me is when I get the most effective use of LRMs in direct fire. Usually it means someone else is brawling with the target and I am slightly above them and shredding their armor.

Are there improvements that can be made with lrms? Yeah I think that direct fire should be at least as fast as the slowest AC. Narc needs to be fixed..

I think though that a lot of folks think it is a 'no skill' weapon because it locks on and only see unskilled users of it firing from behind the hill while they tank all the damage. Positioning is more important for an LRM user than almost any other weapon system, and it makes me facepalm and feel sad when I see a mech sitting at 900m for an entire match with 1000+ lrms and only do 200 damage...

[Cycleboy]

Didn't read the whole thread, but one thing keeps popping in my head for LRMs... allow TRUE indirect fire mechanics. As in, if you don't have a target bracketed/locked, allow the LRMs to be programmed to arc over and drop where you want WITHOUT having to have your cursor/target-pip on the spot. Anyone play Dark Age of Camelot??? The area of effect spells could had a blast template circle that you ran out to certain distance, then you fired it and it hit that spot. Similar could be done for LRMs with no target... hold fire button, run out template to specific distance (could be through building/hill) and fire. LRMs are in large pattern, but will drop in that area. Now you have a real sniper/poptart suppressor.

[Ozric]

I've been running my trusty C1 a lot recently, with the same build, more or less, as I have always run. Except that I really do have to carry a f$*k ton of ammo these days. It still works pretty well but how much of that is because I'm just really down with the build I don't know. Lurms on their own are still painfully weak and require heavy use of back up weapons now more than ever, and as you can see I only run a single JJ and not enough DHS at the moment because of all the bloody ammo..

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...1250dfd32cbc756

I do like the idea of buffing lurms in some fashion but we all know the tightrope of balance that we need to walk to make it happen. That being said, these are two ideas that I do not think would cause any problems.

Increase LRM Range - This has been my personal irk for a long time, as Long Range missiles in MWO are clearly medium range missiles compared to everything else and Long Range is kind of the point of the weapon. TT be damned, it would do the weapon system more good than the lore is worth. There should also be penalties for firing at extreme range just like everything else of course.

Increase LRM ammo per ton - Lurm ammo per ton has been out of whack with the game since 12vs12 by quite a margin. I run lurms in everything and believe that ammo should be increased by as much as 33%. Pretty much any build with a focus on lurms has to break itself to fit enough ammo to last the match, and as you need to optimize for lurms in the first place I'm sure this can not be working as intended. I know the devs were looking at this issue a while back, but I don't know if they decided on anything.

[New Day]

Mr 144, on 21 October 2013 - 11:29 PM, said:

Line of Sight = Flat Trajectory
Indirect Fire = Current Trajectory

or better yet you can switch it at will.

[Reptilizer]

Ozric, on 23 October 2013 - 06:33 AM, said:

*snip*
Increase LRM Range - This has been my personal irk for a long time, as Long Range missiles in MWO are clearly medium range missiles compared to everything else and Long Range is kind of the point of the weapon. TT be damned, it would do the weapon system more good than the lore is worth. There should also be penalties for firing at extreme range just like everything else of course.
*snip*

There are already penalties for firing LRM at longer ranges: Travel time. It takes 10 seconds to reach max range and gives an optic and acoustic warning to your target the whole time. Penalty enough for me.

[Wolfways]

Cycleboy, on 23 October 2013 - 06:00 AM, said:

Didn't read the whole thread, but one thing keeps popping in my head for LRMs... allow TRUE indirect fire mechanics. As in, if you don't have a target bracketed/locked, allow the LRMs to be programmed to arc over and drop where you want WITHOUT having to have your cursor/target-pip on the spot. Anyone play Dark Age of Camelot??? The area of effect spells could had a blast template circle that you ran out to certain distance, then you fired it and it hit that spot. Similar could be done for LRMs with no target... hold fire button, run out template to specific distance (could be through building/hill) and fire. LRMs are in large pattern, but will drop in that area. Now you have a real sniper/poptart suppressor.

Is that like WoT's artillery?

[Cycleboy]

Wolfways, on 23 October 2013 - 06:51 AM, said:

Is that like WoT's artillery?

Kinda. No camera movement though, and you aren't quite as accurate at range for placing the template. In DAoC, you'd look at the ground and red circle would pop up, connected to your feet by dotted line. As you raise crosshairs, the circle would track over the ground as it ran outward based on the angle of your crosshair. If it ran through a wall or over a hill, you'd lose sight of it, but you could generalize where it was by sliding it forward and backward and guess where it was laying.

One thing in DAoC though, you could "pre-range" your template. Place on level ground, see how far out it was, then set that range. Next time you pop up the Ground Target AoE, it would be at that exact distance. You could always change it by holding the targetting button too, but this gives people the ability to kind of know where it will be for fast strikes. Maybe that would work for LRMs too... a hotkey to set LRM indirect distance that unless you hold it will auto set to that range. Oh.. and you'd need a counter ticking on the HUD to show template distance for long ranges... so if you know the hill with the poptart is 400m away, you don't accidentally set range at 850m.

[Mr 144]

Reptilizer, on 23 October 2013 - 01:06 AM, said:

ER-LL for sniping does not work.

Phract is just a troll build with 2 4 slot launchers:
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...d6a25d6fcd87cc3

From the Orions you probably had something like this in mind?
http://mwo.smurfy-ne...29354e2cce4d3bf
Granted, this looks somewhat playable, though you better not get caught. Avoiding XL which makes you even more fragile.

Still, feels somewhat gimped to me. You can also build stuff like this with a cat. Do not like them or more precise: I could not play well with them. But that is just me of course.

Keep in mind that I agree that LRMs could use improving, I'm merely responding to, and providing builds that work fine for me in their current underpowered condition. 'Sniping' was not your criteria in the original post I quoted re:PPCs. We were talking about ridge suppression. ERLLs are definately a fine choice for a ranged compliment nowadays. Regardless, I use both situationally.

I haven't gotten around to Orions, but I do know the 'troll' phract like the back of my hand. These are the prime two versions I use.

This is the PPC version I run...one ton more ammo, and 2 more DHS than the version you posted. I run this mainly in groups.

This is the ERLL version I run while pugging...I'm now up to data tracking the last 20 matches and brought my average damage up to ~375. This is a true pugging average...I do not ignore the occasional 100 damage spankings when things go really bad. At 77kph, postioning is sooo easy. AMS can be exchanged for another ton of ammo, and better RA armor (although you never lose it anyhow).

I call it a troll build too, but don't discount the utility of small tube launchers...especially the 2X's. Always chain fire...either with patience creating superior effect compared to the troll LRM5 A1 due to Artemis and TAG (plus ERLLs or PPCs) with a 4,4,4,3,4,4,4,3 neverending stream....or 'double tap' (not grouped) fire for a larger volley effect of ~8,8,8,6. The reason for never grouping is the ability to directly control the length of the stream at will....either suppression/indirect, or LoS (enabling some protection twist)

I understand those used to Bwuaa Haa Ha LRM boating do not like small tube launchers, but with LoS, TAG, and Artemis...at least 80% will CT track which coupled with the 2 energy weapons of choice provides substantial CT damage...providing more kills than a boating (large spread volley) conterpart...albeit with lower 'braggable' damage numbers.

AMS: yes, multiples can ruin my day, but from experience, there is something different going on compared to the A1 LRM5 (which is completely useless against multiple AMS). It seems that the 'double tap' volley firing creates too many small tight clusters for AMS to deal with as effectively as it should. Yes, it hurts a lot, but I'd estimate half still get through under most scenarios of decent multiple opponent coverage.

I dunno...works for me...is fun...and ~375 damage average ain't bad for heavy LRMs these days....If you have one, try it...it's actually quite fun.

Edit: and of course...Advanced Sensor Range, Target Decay, and Advanced Seismic on both...

Edited by Mr 144, 23 October 2013 - 12:10 PM.

[Candun]

i was using lrm boat with 3 ml and tag and was getting 500-800 dmg a game. just have to shoot at what ya can hit and tag helps ALOT

[Grits N Gravy]

My proposal is this. We keep the current system and call it direct fire mode. Develop and indirect fire mode.

indirect mode is a selectable firing more.

When the player selects indirect fire he is taken to the BV map, his mech stops and locks down. It takes approximately 2 seconds to enter the enter indirect fire and 2 seconds to exit this mode.

While the mech is in indirect mode, the mech cannot move and can only fire the LRM missiles.

Missiles behave much differently while fired from the indirect mode.

Missiles have a minimum range of 350 meters in indirect mode.

Missiles no longer lock on to a target, rather they are used in a "battleship" type game.

Missiles disperse in a circular area as a function of their size.

The larger the launcher size the greater the area dispersion of the missiles.

LRM 20's would disperse 20 missiles randomly in a circle with a area of 40 meters, 15's over 26 metes, 10's over 15 meters, and 5 over 5 meters. From 2 missiles per meter down to 1 missile per meter.

When a missile hits a enemy mech, a dot is shown on the BV grid at the location of the strike.

Players would use LRM 20's and 15's to find targets. Then hone in on the contact with the smaller missile launchers in order to maximize damage on the target.

Players may only 25 missiles in the air at a time. To prevent mapping an entire areas with spam of LRM's and general LRM spam.

Mechs equipped with the Command Console would share hit locations, and targeted areas amongst each other, and be provided mech locations via UAV.

As there is no lock, players are not giving an incoming missile warning when targeted, but rather a missile proximity warning.

Implementation:
While in indirect fire mode, The player selects a launcher or launcher's and clicks any point on the map and the missiles will fire in that range.

Hits are displayed on the map as fading red dots, hit registrations last 4 seconds, after which time they disappear.

Benefits: Encourages mixed missile load outs, discourages alpha maxed loadouts. Helps to create new Meta gameplay, changes dynamic of cover and therathens snipers without ending up in LRM spam fest. Provides new tactical element and role. Encourages Role warfare. Has significant downside to prevent flavor of the month.

Downsides: Long development time, may not be possible on the engine. Coordinated teams may develop battery fire tactics. Where 1 mech acts as spotter while the others spam LRM 5's to quickly destroy targets. Though the lock down penalties and tactics of movement would largely negate this problem.

[Oni Ralas]

Yeah, it's sooo much fun being an LRM boat when everyone is under the awning on new map. Why oh why can't the tubes launch strait when you have LOS....

[Cycleboy]

Grits... about the same thing we were talking about with templates, or distance measures. A spread drop of indirect LRM for suppression. I don't know if I'd even give signals about if you hit or not. If you waste your ammo shooting nothing, your problem. A salvo or two, then get a spotter around to see if they are still hiding back there.

[Lightfoot]

Make LRMs 'fire and forget' like they should be. Not much would change on the receiving end, but the scales would be balanced for the shooter. Your Mech is not sending tracking info to the LRMs in flight, but MWO plays them that way. In Battletech LRMs are autonomous after launching, having received all targeting info from Artemis and BAP prior to launch. Only exceptions are TAG and Narc.

Fire-and-Forget LRMs, it's the action-style for missiles because you can hit and fade instead of just standing there like a lump.

[Oni Ralas]

I am now certain the explosion velocity calculations are wrong.

[Cycleboy]

Lightfoot, on 24 October 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:

Make LRMs 'fire and forget' like they should be. Not much would change on the receiving end, but the scales would be balanced for the shooter. Your Mech is not sending tracking info to the LRMs in flight, but MWO plays them that way. In Battletech LRMs are autonomous after launching, having received all targeting info from Artemis and BAP prior to launch. Only exceptions are TAG and Narc.

Fire-and-Forget LRMs, it's the action-style for missiles because you can hit and fade instead of just standing there like a lump.

F&F would tie in PERFECTLY to Aretmis, TAG, and NARC effects. If you keep them in sight or have a TAG/NARC on mech, big bonuses to missile tracking. If not, lose effect but LRMs don't go dumb. Then they could open the grouping pattern a bit for standard LRM so that LOS effects are good but not mandatory.

[GODzillaGSPB]

Lightfoot, on 24 October 2013 - 08:54 AM, said:

Make LRMs 'fire and forget' like they should be. Not much would change on the receiving end, but the scales would be balanced for the shooter. Your Mech is not sending tracking info to the LRMs in flight, but MWO plays them that way. In Battletech LRMs are autonomous after launching, having received all targeting info from Artemis and BAP prior to launch. Only exceptions are TAG and Narc.

Fire-and-Forget LRMs, it's the action-style for missiles because you can hit and fade instead of just standing there like a lump.

I'm not even a heavy LRM user, but still support the idea, with one addition, for the sake of balance / gameplay: Only with Artemis.

Gotta have a drawback, gotta have the need to invest extra tonnage and crit space for this convenient behavior. Imho.

[Steve Pryde]

GODzillaGSPB, on 24 October 2013 - 11:21 AM, said:

I'm not even a heavy LRM user, but still support the idea, with one addition, for the sake of balance / gameplay: Only with Artemis.

Gotta have a drawback, gotta have the need to invest extra tonnage and crit space for this convenient behavior. Imho.

Sounds better and better. Would love fire&forget missiles that are directly flying so much. Please PGI, take advice from these suggestions.

At the moment it makes no sense to use LRMs if you don't boat them like hell and thats sad.

Edited by Steve Pryde, 25 October 2013 - 05:37 AM.

[Barantor]

Steve Pryde, on 25 October 2013 - 05:35 AM, said:

At the moment it makes no sense to use LRMs if you don't boat them like hell and thats sad.

It does, but it adds complication to a build. You go from a direct damage high alpha build to a hybrid. It is harder to use and thus not usually seen as effective as say .... 4 AC5s. Having 1 AC5 and 2 lrm10s would seem ridiculous because of the varying ranges, travel to target times and aiming method. You could hit with all of them, but it wouldn't be as devastating to the target as being hit by 4 ACs in the same location.

[Shakespeare]

For me, a reasonable adjustment would be:

Faster missiles, so that long range actually means long range. Right now, it's way too easy to dodge past 600m. keep in mind, most missile mechs have to literally stare at you for the entire travel time of missiles, which opens them up to significant return fire, and makes them near useless against sniper/JJ mechs. Can't suppress a target if he can read the news paper and brew espresso before moving out of the way of your 'missile barrage'.. Less time to target means better survival rates on direct fire LRMs.

Hard-limit to the tube count. (as in, a mech with a 15 max only gets 15 at once, not 15 per hardpoint.) This would cut down on the hardcore spamming we see every time missiles are adjusted directly for damage, it will give greater utility to large launchers vs small ones as well as missile-oriented mechs in general, and it will normalize the conflicting systems such that adjusting damage or flight patterns could be done without creating another LRM disaster.

In my opinion, obviously.

(I know, this is my third post stating these things, but you never know which LRM thread will take off, and I want LRMs to be good. Long version, more examples/explanation here: http://mwomercs.com/...romise-on-lrms/ )