223 replies to this topic

[Jaeger Gonzo]

Total rework should be better. Now we have some sort of MRM. Make srm an srm. That means something more close to lrm and streaks. With longer locking time, lower speed and ability to fire without lock.

[Mister Blastman]

Thorn Hallis, on 26 February 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

Actually you will "only" have to wait 'til June. With the introduction of the Clans and Streak SRM6s, brawling might be on the rise again.

Thinking of it...thats some strange sort of advertisment: "You want working SRMs? Go Clan!"

That's only if you shell out big bucks.

Otherwise you're stuck waiting months to get a clan mech. But that's another problem for another thread.

[East Indy]

Bagheera, on 26 February 2014 - 10:30 AM, said:

I also wish people would stop suggesting to make them like streaks. Just No. I like my rocket-shotgun thank you very much. Making them "weaker streaks" just sound awful to me.

Hey, maybe I wish players would stop making wildly impractical suggestions to Piranha, then tossing insults when Piranha decides to pass.

I think you and your friend need to reread what Josef wrote. Or read any post more carefully. You take the time to get riled up about the one mechanic that works (lock-on), but miss the strong qualifier ("many downsides") in the same paragraph. No solution is perfect; learn that.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

If the idea is a quick tweak for SRMs, I'd rather consider increasing missile speed and reducing projectile counts.

So go to 425 m/s from 300, to see if that extra 125 m/s is enough, otherwise raise that value as necessary.

Then to help with hits, trying this out is what I'd do:

• SRM 2 - fires one missile, 4 damage
  
• SRM 4 - fires two missiles, 4 damage each, 8 total damage
  
• SRM 6 - fires three missiles, 4 damage each, 12 damage total

And if we keep the current ammo count at 100 missiles per ton, that can help out smaller mechs that carry less tons to ammo also.

[Malcolm Vordermark]

Thorn Hallis, on 26 February 2014 - 10:50 AM, said:

Actually you will "only" have to wait 'til June. With the introduction of the Clans and Streak SRM6s, brawling might be on the rise again.

Thinking of it...thats some strange sort of advertisment: "You want working SRMs? Go Clan!"

That the advanced clan tech for you. They added guidance to overcome HSR issues.

[Mister Blastman]

East Indy, on 26 February 2014 - 10:55 AM, said:

Hey, maybe I wish players would stop making wildly impractical suggestions to Piranha, then tossing insults when Piranha decides to pass.

Nothing I suggested was impractical. All of it was already done and coded in. It can be shoehorned in as a band-aid, stop-gap until the real fix can be put in.

Or they could just do a table edit and double SRM damage to say 4 pts. At least the the few that hit will hurt. Table edit takes minutes and no code.

[East Indy]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 26 February 2014 - 10:54 AM, said:

SRM's by their nature are not pinpoint. They never have been.

Well aware. But when someone suggests close formation after leaving the launcher, what they're really asking for, whether they realize it or not, is pinpoint. It's like asking for more pellet damage for LB-10: it's simply trying to fit more damage per component. It's missing the point of why players opt for the meta.

[Reptilizer]

ackstorm, on 26 February 2014 - 10:49 AM, said:

You have a left arm that contains no weapons. If you are not close enough to keep them turning, present your sides to them so that their damage can be shrugged off. If you cannot get in close to outmaneuver them then dont engage. Make them come to you.

Nice theory with some hooks and barbs.

You realize that you have to face the mech to apply your damage? In a brawl even weapons on arms only help so far to fully avoid this. Pinpoint high alpha just has to come in the right moment. Clever enemy is clever.
Also the arm does not shield all of you mech hitboxes. Again, a good shot and the high alpha pinpoint damage make sure you can be hit anywhere except left torso perhaps.
Also be REALLY careful when you try this with somebody who can aim because even a few degrees in the wrong direction will present your backside which is instadeath in this setup. High alpha pinpoint...

I am by all means not an ace pilot and i am sure there are people who could have survived the encounter. But still i feel something is off here.
First thought looking at my smoking mech was "should not have brought my old cent for a brawl". But then again, what kind of fight should you bring the close range brawler to nowadays???

[East Indy]

Mister Blastman, on 26 February 2014 - 10:59 AM, said:

Nothing I suggested was impractical. All of it was already done and coded in. It can be shoehorned in as a band-aid, stop-gap until the real fix can be put in.

Josef was impolite in going about it, but it's true that coding is a lot more intertwined than it might appear from the user's side. Developers will tell stories of totally unrelated functions going haywire from what should've been a simple fix.

Tables? Yeah, I agree values can be changed.

And like I said, I agree in principle and don't want Piranha to forget (or think that players have).

[Bagheera]

East Indy, on 26 February 2014 - 10:55 AM, said:

Hey, maybe I wish players would stop making wildly impractical suggestions to Piranha, then tossing insults when Piranha decides to pass.

Dafuq?

You need to relax son. All I ever stated is that hsr should be the priority regarding srm fixes and that I didn't expect Russ' timeline to change. I'm categorically against the return of splash and have made precisely zero derogatory remarks about pgi in this thread. I made no value judgment on their timeline, just expressed a preference. Furthermore I went out of my way to explain why we shouldn't go back to the old code.

Either you took our difference of opinion on what makes for a fun weapon (highly subjective, streaks are boring imo) WAY to personally or you need more practice at reading comprehension.




Edited for stupid phone autocorrect.

Edited by Bagheera, 26 February 2014 - 11:07 AM.

[Dymlos2003]

Mister Blastman, on 26 February 2014 - 10:22 AM, said:

LBX vs. 2x PPCs and 2x AC5 (or 1 AC20) =

LBX will die. Horribly. You'll give him papercuts while he blows a hole right through you.

So you don't know how to use a LBX, gotcha.

[Mister Blastman]

Dymlos2003, on 26 February 2014 - 11:05 AM, said:

So you don't know how to use a LBX, gotcha.

It isn't that I don't know how, I just don't use it because it is trash-tier. If it did 1.4 damage a pellet instead of 1.0... well, I'd be more compelled to try it but still wouldn't often due to pin-point having huge advantages.

Now if we had an LB-20X that did 1.4 a pellet...

Edited by Mister Blastman, 26 February 2014 - 11:06 AM.

[Artgathan]

I suggest two buffs to SRMs:

• Increase their ammo to 144/ton (divisible by 2/4/6) to match other weapons (SRMs are actually most hurt by current mechanics + doubled armor - autocannons are not)
  
• Increase their RoF. Currently SRMs have impressive DPS for their tonnage (SRM6 has 3 DPS), but this is not effective DPS - it's scattered over the armor of the target.

[IceSerpent]

ackstorm, on 26 February 2014 - 10:46 AM, said:

Yes. If you stand still and take it. Slow moving assault mechs certainly feel the effect because they cannot outmaneuver their opponents. That rises the importance of having fast moving light and medium mechs to keep them from standing there and sniping.

You do realize that SRMs have the lowest projectile speed compared to non-missile weapons, right?

[Deathlike]

Mister Blastman, on 26 February 2014 - 10:59 AM, said:

Nothing I suggested was impractical. All of it was already done and coded in. It can be shoehorned in as a band-aid, stop-gap until the real fix can be put in.

Or they could just do a table edit and double SRM damage to say 4 pts. At least the the few that hit will hurt. Table edit takes minutes and no code.

I'm pretty sure the forums will burn down with 4. Try 2.5 first, then increase as needed.

East Indy, on 26 February 2014 - 10:59 AM, said:

Well aware. But when someone suggests close formation after leaving the launcher, what they're really asking for, whether they realize it or not, is pinpoint. It's like asking for more pellet damage for LB-10: it's simply trying to fit more damage per component. It's missing the point of why players opt for the meta.

Well, that's what Artemis is for (concentrated damage within an area). The spread dictates how effective the weapon would be.

The actual difference between that and LBX10, is that the spread on the LBX10 is OK, but the damage dealt is weak due to the natural spread (it's somewhat less concentrated, since it covers a wider area - you don't have an Artemis equivalent to work with) and the damage per pellet does not generate enough damage to justify its use over the AC10 or even the UAC5 (pinpoint damage). Noone is asking the LBX10 do deal 20 damage in total... but something like 14 (1.4 per pellet) is not unreasonable.

Understanding the weapon requires actually "dealing with reality", not just "how you feel".

[Dymlos2003]

Mister Blastman, on 26 February 2014 - 11:05 AM, said:

It isn't that I don't know how, I just don't use it because it is trash-tier. If it did 1.4 damage a pellet instead of 1.0... well, I'd be more compelled to try it but still wouldn't often due to pin-point having huge advantages.

Now if we had an LB-20X that did 1.4 a pellet...

That's the thing, it isn't trash tier. You just don't know how to use it. Just like SRMS you just suck with them.

[Mister Blastman]

Deathlike, on 26 February 2014 - 11:07 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure the forums will burn down with 4. Try 2.5 first, then increase as needed.

Ahh but the burning would be so epic!

[DeathofSelf]

WTF!? I missed the not till after CW post... Although I shouldn't be surprised, another genius move by PGI

[Mister Blastman]

Dymlos2003, on 26 February 2014 - 11:08 AM, said:

That's the thing, it isn't trash tier. You just don't know how to use it. Just like SRMS you just suck with them.

lol

Okay bud. I suck with SRMs. You got me! I'm a terribad.

I'm one of these!!!!!!!!


Any other tidbits you'd like to suggest?

:-|

[Josef Nader]

East Indy, on 26 February 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:

Josef was impolite in going about it, but it's true that coding is a lot more intertwined than it might appear from the user's side. Developers will tell stories of totally unrelated functions going haywire from what should've been a simple fix.

Tables? Yeah, I agree values can be changed.

And like I said, I agree in principle and don't want Piranha to forget (or think that players have).

Yeah, it's hard to not get gruff when someone with no experience starts lecturing you on how to do your job and how blindingly simple it would be to implement their suggestions all while simultaneously ignoring your explanations as to why their suggestions are highly impractical and counterproductive to the finished product.

It's amazing how many people become instant experts in game design, theory, development, and the day-to-day development because they play a lot of video games and took a programming class in high school. OP is hardly the first one to give me an earful about how the developers of their favorite game are totally clowns and they should totally implement their completely reasonable, practical, and well thought out suggestions to fix the game all while talking over my counter-explanation as to why their suggestions are non-starters and why the developers did what they did.

You learn very quickly when you're developing games that the best thing to do when it comes to balance is to ignore your community entirely and balance around actual gameplay metrics. Your community will complain about everything all while simultaneously swearing they could do your job better and demonstrating a total lack of understanding of the underlying processes at play. Statistics don't lie, and they don't get buttmad because the way they want to play is getting shut down by another style of play that they perceive as too powerful. PGI learned early on not to balance around it's community, but to balance around statistics, and the game has been getting better with every balance patch.