22 replies to this topic

[Sephlock]

So far, it seems that they can't change the tonnage of the launchers (though they may change the ammo/ton, that solution is far too sensible given their goals), they don't want to remove the min range (but have considered making them dumbfire within 180 meters), and just flat out hate LRMs in general and missile weapons in particular.

How do you think they're going to ruin handle Clan LRMs?

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

The following are half hopes and half expectations based on the indications they've given so far:

1 - 75m minimum range (matches the defense turrets currently in-game).
2 - Flatter trajectory for less effective indirect fire.
3 - 100 missiles/ton to help reduce the overall efficiency of the weapon without changing launcher weight.
4 - Wide spread at launch, with reduced pattern as it goes farther.
5 - Reduced RoF relative to IS LRMs.

The following are possibilities that I don't think are as likely:

1 - Ripple fire, so enemy AMS has more of a shot at taking down the missiles, and so it's easier to juke later portions of a volley even if the initial missiles get you.
2 - The launchers explode when destroyed, similar to the Gauss (at 1.1 damage per tube).
3 - Phased missile arming, so you get a % of a given volley armed at launch, scaling up over distance until it hits some cutoff (180m perhaps), meaning the closer the target the more dud missiles there will be at impact.
4 - Sizeable heat increases with prohibitive ghost heat for stacking more than 20-30 missiles in a volley.

[Sephlock]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 10 February 2014 - 01:05 PM, said:

The following are half hopes and half expectations based on the indications they've given so far:

1 - 75m minimum range (matches the defense turrets currently in-game).
2 - Flatter trajectory for less effective indirect fire.
3 - 100 missiles/ton to help reduce the overall efficiency of the weapon without changing launcher weight.
4 - Wide spread at launch, with reduced pattern as it goes farther.
5 - Reduced RoF relative to IS LRMs.

The following are possibilities that I don't think are as likely:

1 - Ripple fire, so enemy AMS has more of a shot at taking down the missiles, and so it's easier to juke later portions of a volley even if the initial missiles get you.
2 - The launchers explode when destroyed, similar to the Gauss (at 1.1 damage per tube).
3 - Phased missile arming, so you get a % of a given volley armed at launch, scaling up over distance until it hits some cutoff (180m perhaps), meaning the closer the target the more dud missiles there will be at impact.
4 - Sizeable heat increases with prohibitive ghost heat for stacking more than 20-30 missiles in a volley.

The thing is, based on past results, they are going to do ALL of those things when really any one or maybe two would be just fine.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

Sephlock, on 10 February 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

The thing is, based on past results, they are going to do ALL of those things when really any one or maybe two would be just fine.

Well, except for a few super prohibitive ones, only one or two won't really cut it given the huge inherent advantages that cLRMs have in the TT. I'd actually favor doing all 5 of the things in my first set of potential changes, and would rather avoid all the ones in the second list (some of those are contradictory to other changes).

[LauLiao]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 10 February 2014 - 01:05 PM, said:

.

The following are possibilities that I don't think are as likely:

1 - Ripple fire, so enemy AMS has more of a shot at taking down the missiles, and so it's easier to juke later portions of a volley even if the initial missiles get you.

I swear I remember reading from a Dev somewhere that they were looking at this as a possibility, but I could be wrong.

[Levi Porphyrogenitus]

LauLiao, on 10 February 2014 - 01:10 PM, said:

I swear I remember reading from a Dev somewhere that they were looking at this as a possibility, but I could be wrong.

I think it was mentioned in context of cSSRMs, since they'll have much larger throw weight than IS SSRM2s.

[LauLiao]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 10 February 2014 - 01:24 PM, said:

I think it was mentioned in context of cSSRMs, since they'll have much larger throw weight than IS SSRM2s.

THAT'S what it was. Thank you Levi.

[Sephlock]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 10 February 2014 - 01:10 PM, said:

Well, except for a few super prohibitive ones, only one or two won't really cut it given the huge inherent advantages that cLRMs have in the TT. I'd actually favor doing all 5 of the things in my first set of potential changes, and would rather avoid all the ones in the second list (some of those are contradictory to other changes).

The solution would be to buff IS LRMs .

[Jman5]

They could reduce the minimum range. They hinted at that when they were talking about the Missile Turrets in the last patch.

[SweetJackal]

What I want to see for Clan LRMs, snipped from the Clan Tech Design Feedback thread:

SuckyJack, on 10 February 2014 - 08:06 AM, said:

*snip*
Clan LRMs could work like Pursuit Missiles from the Armored Core series. That is, a very large missile spread when initially launched with a very small missile spread (higher density) the further out the missiles fly. This means that Clan LRMS would have the same or tighter spread out around maximum range but a larger spread (more missiles missing the target) at closer ranges. This means that the Clan LRMs are much more specialized than IS LRMs and the tonnage saved on Clan LRMS would be required to be spent on weapons or more ammo to retain effectiveness at mid range.
*snip*

[Sephlock]

Here's an idea: Leave Clan LRMs as they are in TT and just have an IS only playlist so people who want to play with gimped, useless LRMs can do so.

Because think about it:

Won't these nerfs ensure that we won't see Clan LRMs at the higher levels of play, just like IS LRMs?

Will any of those changes prevent the same idiots who die to IS LRMs because they wander out into the open and refuse to go for cover) from dying in exactly the same manner?

[Belorion]

They will try and nerf them, while still feeling like clan weapons, and they will still be better than IS LRMs

[Strum Wealh]

Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 10 February 2014 - 01:05 PM, said:

The following are half hopes and half expectations based on the indications they've given so far:

1 - 75m minimum range (matches the defense turrets currently in-game).
2 - Flatter trajectory for less effective indirect fire.
3 - 100 missiles/ton to help reduce the overall efficiency of the weapon without changing launcher weight.
4 - Wide spread at launch, with reduced pattern as it goes farther.
5 - Reduced RoF relative to IS LRMs.

The following are possibilities that I don't think are as likely:

1 - Ripple fire, so enemy AMS has more of a shot at taking down the missiles, and so it's easier to juke later portions of a volley even if the initial missiles get you.
2 - The launchers explode when destroyed, similar to the Gauss (at 1.1 damage per tube).
3 - Phased missile arming, so you get a % of a given volley armed at launch, scaling up over distance until it hits some cutoff (180m perhaps), meaning the closer the target the more dud missiles there will be at impact.
4 - Sizeable heat increases with prohibitive ghost heat for stacking more than 20-30 missiles in a volley.

Personally, I think PGI going with (2) and (5) from the first list & (1), (2), and (4) from the second list would result in something that is sufficiently different while being both interesting and workable.

[Sephlock]

Ripple fire would lead to noob tears though. It doesn't matter how easily they are shot down by AMS. People will just walk out into the open sans AMS, die horribly, and then complain until the impulse value + some other factors are nerfed.

Ammo/ton could seriously bork Clan mechs due to the limited space (thanks to unremovable endo, ferro, xl engines (albeit clan xl engines), some heat sinks, some weapons, etc). One way that this could work, however, is to make each slot of ammo weigh multiple tons (so one slot's worth of ammo is 2 or more tons).

At least that could turn LRMs into weapons like the old Roman pilum (fire near the beginning of a match, then engage as normal).

Regardless, good thing clan mechs have case built in.

[SweetJackal]

Sephlock, on 12 February 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

Regardless, good thing clan mechs have case built in.

It's not that Case is free, it's that the Arms or Legs can get Case. Which is HUGE

[LauLiao]

SuckyJack, on 12 February 2014 - 02:12 PM, said:

It's not that Case is free, it's that the Arms or Legs can get Case. Which is HUGE

Ha, just had this discussion in another thread:

CASE

• Clan 'Mechs automatically receive CASE in any location where ammunition or an explosive weapon is placed.
  
• This CASE does not take up tonnage.
  
• This CASE does not take up critical slots.
  
• This CASE has no cost.
  
• This CASE otherwise behaves the same as Inner Sphere CASE.

"

[Sephlock]

I just hope that they re-introduce knockdown soon... I want to be able to fire LRMs at a ridge humper and cause him to back up into and knock down his fellow snipers.

Or better yet, use Arty smoke:

[Craig Steele]

SuckyJack, on 12 February 2014 - 02:12 PM, said:

It's not that Case is free, it's that the Arms or Legs can get Case. Which is HUGE

Case is free on Clan mechs, no tonnage, no crits, any location with ammo.

[SweetJackal]

I didn't mean to say that Clan Mechs don't get free Case. I meant that the Case being free isn't the big deal. The big deal is that Clan Mechs can get that Case in the Arms or Legs.

Free Case wouldn't have been a real boon if it was limited to the Side Torsos like on IS Mechs. Likewise if IS Mechs could put Case in the Legs or Arms then Case would get used a hell of a lot more in the game.

[Monky]

LauLiao, on 10 February 2014 - 01:10 PM, said:

I swear I remember reading from a Dev somewhere that they were looking at this as a possibility, but I could be wrong.

I wish they did this for all missiles, it would make it easier to compare missile mechs and put more viable LRM boats in the game with a corresponding increase in LRM/SRM travel speed and reasonably quick ripple time. Also, it would make it way easier on the art team as they only have to add SRM2 and LRM5 ports to variants with more hardpoints than default missile ports.