383 replies to this topic

[Cimarb]

3rdworld, on 04 March 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

Many mechs in BT lore carried like a single LRM 10 or something like that. I just want to see a reason why I would consider putting an LRM 10 on my highlander.

Right now, if you aren't really going full boar LRM mech, there is not much of a point to lrms.

I have LRM boats (mostly my Stalker), but I also equip an LRM on a good portion of my mechs just for psychological means. That warning is often of more use than the actual damage done, as it keeps heads down while my team and I advance. It also lets me fire off a parting shot as someone back pedals out of view.

3rdworld, on 04 March 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

When you say harasser, I read "waste of tonnage".

In addition to what I mentioned above, I have plenty of harasser mechs too. These would be the Shads, Cats and Kintaros that have 3-5+ LRM5s on chain fire - THAT is harassment. Most of those builds have an ERPPC or ERLL for the primary weapon, though.

[TygerLily]

3rdworld, on 04 March 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

That is true. But tipping the pendulum to much to LRMs makes no one happy either.

Many mechs in BT lore carried like a single LRM 10 or something like that. I just want to see a reason why I would consider putting an LRM 10 on my highlander.

My team experiemented with "everyone bring an LRM" as a tactic. So instead of a boat, we spread the love but in a effect the philosophy was the same, moar LRMs are needed to make it effective.

What's your opinion on a fix?

1) I definitly think faster LRM flight would be good. More would hit and therefore it does more damage without having to mess with the damage value.

2) I also think that Artemis, since it adds a whole freaking ton AND requires line of sight, should do a lot more. Faster locks are nice, but maybe the smaller the launcher, the more chance there is for a volley to hone CT.

For example, maybe:

-An LRM 5 hones in with a 70% chance, per missile, to hit CT, 20% chance to hit RT or LT and 10% chance to hit a limb or head.

-An LRM 10 hones in with 60% chance, per missile, to hit CT, 25% chance to hit RT or LT and 15% chance to hit a limb or head.

-An LRM 15 hones in with 50% chance, per missile, to hit CT, 30% chance to hit RT or LT and 20% chance to hit a limb or head.

- An LRM 20 hones in with 40% chance, per missile, to hit CT, 35% chance to hit RT or LT and 25% chance to hit a limb or head.

This would have to be for a single launcher. Group firing would a calculate them based on their total...so two LRM 5s, group fired, would come in as an LRM10 -- better for stripping armor. But if you chain-fired them, they would come in as a 5's -- better for coring.This might seem OP for LRM5 Cats/Kintaros/etc. but remember they need to both give up a ton per launcher for Artemis (so an extra 6 tons for six Artemis-5's on a Cat) AND have line of sight, else the missiles come in with the same spread they would have without Artemis.

Ida know...could be a bad idea based on those specific numbers but maybe it could work if fine tuned? If it proved deadly enought, nix the fligth buff...

[Abivard]

wanderer, on 04 March 2014 - 06:24 AM, said:

So, tell me. Where's the risk in using pure AC's?

Running out of ammo.

Overheating

Poor hit reg

Needs a direct line of sight.

If more people would look at the Forest as a whole instead of their favorite Tree, we could hopefully avoid so many Moot discussions.

[Cimarb]

Abivard, on 04 March 2014 - 08:51 AM, said:

Running out of ammo.

Overheating

Poor hit reg

Needs a direct line of sight.

If more people would look at the Forest as a whole instead of their favorite Tree, we could hopefully avoid so many Moot discussions.

1. Running out of ammo - LRMs have this risk as well
2. Overheating - LRMs have this risk as well
3. Poor hit reg - LRMs have this risk as well
4. Needs a direct line of sight - valid, though indirect fire is immensely less effective than direct with LRMs

Your forest looks more like a shrub, lol.

[Almond Brown]

Kjudoon, on 28 February 2014 - 10:11 AM, said:

You don't run LRMs do you? Way too often when my lance goes in with over 150LRM tubes I hear a constant complaint about LRM boats and bleeping missiles. I never hear this level of kvetching about any other weapon. Tier one... okay. keep thinking that.

How can that be? Word on this Forum is that Missiles suck. Who complains about a weapon systems that sucks, the shooter or the shootee? Both can't be right, right?

[Joseph Mallan]

Abivard, on 04 March 2014 - 08:51 AM, said:

Running out of ammo.

Overheating

Poor hit reg

Needs a direct line of sight.

If more people would look at the Forest as a whole instead of their favorite Tree, we could hopefully avoid so many Moot discussions.

Cimarb, on 04 March 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:

1. Running out of ammo - LRMs have this risk as well
2. Overheating - LRMs have this risk as well
3. Poor hit reg - LRMs have this risk as well
4. Needs a direct line of sight - valid, though indirect fire is immensely less effective than direct with LRMs

Your forest looks more like a shrub, lol.

Continue...

Just in case, I think both of you are making good cases and the discussion is quite enlightening. So please on't think I was being insulting. I have enjoyed following both your logical paths.

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 04 March 2014 - 10:17 AM.

[Trauglodyte]

3rdworld, on 04 March 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

That is true. But tipping the pendulum to much to LRMs makes no one happy either.

Many mechs in BT lore carried like a single LRM 10 or something like that. I just want to see a reason why I would consider putting an LRM 10 on my highlander.

Right now, if you aren't really going full boar LRM mech, there is not much of a point to lrms.

The Shadowhawk is a good example. It, and many mechs like it, would carry a single LRM5 or 10 as a long ranged assist weapons. That means that it wasn't going to be a massive threat at range BUT it could slowly cause an issue. The problem in MWO is that ECM is prevelant enough to dismiss the power of the base t1 tech low end launcher and, even without ECM, a single or double AMS is enough to negate the power of that launcher.

On the other hand, mechs like the base Catapult that ran an LRM30 or 40, depending on the build, aren't bringing their true power to bear because it is so easy to negate the impact. An LRM40 should be as scary as an AC40 given how easy it is to minimize the impact of the launchers. But, the truth is that they aren't. That LRM20 is more like an LRM17 IF you land your payload.

Quote

When you say harasser, I read "waste of tonnage".

I don't think that a single LRM5 or 10 is a waste. I've got an ALRM15 w/ TAG on my Tbolt that I can/do use when I'm circling a fight and I don't have LOS. And, it affords me the ability to put damage on a target as I close in without going heat crazy with my PPC. The problem, though, is that I'm thinking like that whiel knowing that there are no heat penalties in this game. But, I also know that once I get into range, I'm going to spike my heat with 5 Md Lasers. So, it gives me the ability to stay heat careful, so to speak, until I get into a better spot to go nuts.

I would much appreciate that ALRM15 w/ TAG be as effective as the weight investment indicatest that it should be. At 9 tons, it should *SHOULD* be as effective as a UAC5 but it isn't. Though, now you're arguing the semantics of lock and guidance vs. leading your target and no issues of jamming vs. well losing your weapon for 8s.

Abivard, on 04 March 2014 - 08:51 AM, said:

Running out of ammo. - your fault

Overheating - your fault

Poor hit reg - PGI's fault but it goes for all weapons including missiles

Needs a direct line of sight. - so do LRMs for decent damage

If more people would look at the Forest as a whole instead of their favorite Tree, we could hopefully avoid so many Moot discussions.

We're looking at the forest just fine. Like I said above, for 9 tons of investment for the ALRM15 w/ TAG, I should get the same mileage as you with the UAC. Each has it's own quirks and issues but the LRM isn't getting anywhere near the performance of the UAC.

[Almond Brown]

Kommisar, on 02 March 2014 - 10:05 AM, said:

I'll largely agree with Highlander up there.

Right now, beyond a player wanting to use LRMs for personal reasons, there is very little reason to do so. Ballistics have:

• Equal or better range.
  
• Are pinpoint damage dealers.
  
• Fire faster (cool down and time on target for the damage)
  
• With less Heat
  
• Significantly less logistics needed to work (holding lock)
  
• Are fire and forget (it's a bullet)
  
• Do not require extra modules and equipment to be effective (BAP, modules)
  
• Are not hard-countered by anything
  
• Have no minimum range
  
• Light Mechs cannot out-run your rounds

About the only thing the LRM has going for it is that they can track a target. In use, though, I will say that this does not make up for all the other downsides. The fact remains that if you are serious and want to deal 5 points of damage to a target at range, you go with an AC/5 every time over an LRM5. Or, even an AC/2 given rate of fire.

In my experience, LRMs become their most effective in the ranges of 400m to 200m. Typically firing into a brawl, with LOS for Artemis support, while Tagging, taking advantage of the decreased flight time due to shorter distance. But for all of that, a Medium laser (or group of them) is far better at those ranges since you can target individual locations on the target.

LRMs are a mess. Increased speed is a good first step; but it will not be the last if they want to be more than a weapon guys take because they WANT to use LRMs for lore/nostalgia reasons.

EDIT: I should note that LRMs do have one extra advantage against newer pilots. Psychological. The alarms and warnings can cause inexperienced pilots to panic, move, disengage or whatever. Even if it is just a single LRM5 launch which their (or a teammate's) AMS will eat. Against better, veteran players, however, this effect drops off.

So you wish your LRM5 to do a guaranteed 5 points if all you have to do is get lock on any target after 1-3 seconds and then pull the trigger? Guess what, even your AC5 (super OP Ballistic) doesn't guarantee you 5 points every pull.

Unless you wish to expose yourself, LRM's are effectively a "tag team" weapons system. Pardon the pun. We have all seem LRMAgeddon. Not many wish to see it again. Missiles work great by those who "understand" how best to use them. Make them to Newb friendly and everyone will once again suffer there wrath.

This is a perfect case of "be very careful of what you wish for".

[Almond Brown]

Joseph Mallan, on 04 March 2014 - 05:29 AM, said:

Become very VERY close friends with the resident D-DC.

and become Arty bait along with him. LOL!

[Almond Brown]

3rdworld, on 04 March 2014 - 06:41 AM, said:

To me the problems with LRMs is making a single launcher a viable addition to any mech, without making the OP when massed.

Besides some silly, complex BS technical mechanic it would entail (everyone loves those around here btw) other than directly limiting the number of launchers allowed, they could make the LRM5 4 points each, while the LRM20 stays @1 each, then not allow more than 1 LRM5, or reverse it, only 1 LRM20 and a max of 4 LRM5's, or 2 x LRM10's etc etc etc.

Or just go back to every chassis and set some arbitrary number of max tubes allowed based on what the Mech has form Missiles slots already.

Currently only 2 chassis have 6 launchers. With that as a max, set the missile damage levels to some value divided +/- 90 tubes (given the A1 @6x15) and go from there.

With stacking allowed, a very tough chore indeed. Despite the hate it would elicit from many as being a yet another NERF...

[Joseph Mallan]

Almond Brown, on 04 March 2014 - 09:33 AM, said:

and become Arty bait along with him. LOL!

Nope. Thats when you tell him you need your space. It's not him it's you... Call me!

[Cimarb]

Almond Brown, on 04 March 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

Besides some silly, complex BS technical mechanic it would entail (everyone loves those around here btw) other than directly limiting the number of launchers allowed, they could make the LRM5 4 points each, while the LRM20 stays @1 each, then not allow more than 1 LRM5, or reverse it, only 1 LRM20 and a max of 4 LRM5's, or 2 x LRM10's etc etc etc.

Or just go back to every chassis and set some arbitrary number of max tubes allowed based on what the Mech has form Missiles slots already.

Currently only 2 chassis have 6 launchers. With that as a max, set the missile damage levels to some value divided +/- 90 tubes (given the A1 @6x15) and go from there.

With stacking allowed, a very tough chore indeed. Despite the hate it would elicit from many as being a yet another NERF...

Sounds like Ghost LRMs to me - I vote no, sorry.

Hard points already limit the number of launchers you can take, while weight and space are two other limiting factors. No need to add arbitrary rules to make them as averaged out as ACs have been implemented, where every single AC is effectively an AC20 but with different delivery rates.

[Wolfways]

Imo if you get killed by LRM's it is one of three reasons:

1) You're new to MWO and haven't figured out how to use cover.
2) You aren't new but still haven't learned, or refuse to learn how to use cover.
3) You just had bad luck (If it rarely happens).

I don't use AMS or ECM yet i completely ignore LRM's simply because i'm using cover while fighting anyway.

[Mechteric]

What if they made no changes to LRMs damage or flight speed/path, but made them fire and forget? In other words once you lock and fire, you don't have to maintain lock.

Now to make it fair if they lose you as a contact on the radar it should "lose lock" like it does now but it would be nice if you didn't have to maintain cursor on target the whole flight because that means you can't really use other weapons during flight-time very effectively or risk losing lock.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 04 March 2014 - 12:40 PM.

[Trauglodyte]

CapperDeluxe, on 04 March 2014 - 12:40 PM, said:

What if they made no changes to LRMs damage or flight speed/path, but made them fire and forget? In other words once you lock and fire, you don't have to maintain lock.

Now to make it fair if they lose you as a contact on the radar it should "lose lock" like it does now but it would be nice if you didn't have to maintain cursor on target the whole flight because that means you can't really use other weapons during flight-time very effectively or risk losing lock.

The only issue with that is that the system used for LRMs is also used for Streaks. I'm unsure that it would impact them much but it would still be there.

[Aym]

wanderer, on 04 March 2014 - 06:45 AM, said:

You take four AC/5's. I'll take four Artemis-IV LRM 15's and we can trade shots.

Bet who's dead first?

Massed LRMs aren't OP- they're simply enough missiles to compensate for the damage spread so they actually kill something vs. sand all the armor off. If you're being obliterated, generally it's 2-3 missile boats pummeling you at once.

If you had 2-3 'Mechs emptying AC's and Gauss into your chest at once, how long would you last?

In general Time to live, or time to kill, is too low in this game, and AC ROF is definitely one example of something that could help this issue.

[Mechteric]

Trauglodyte, on 04 March 2014 - 12:43 PM, said:

The only issue with that is that the system used for LRMs is also used for Streaks. I'm unsure that it would impact them much but it would still be there.

Streaks have such a short range and time to impact it wouldn't make them any better than they already are I think

[Trauglodyte]

CapperDeluxe, on 04 March 2014 - 12:57 PM, said:

Streaks have such a short range and time to impact it wouldn't make them any better than they already are I think

That is my thinking a, as well. I was just pointing it out. A lot of people come up with good solid ideas but other weaposn that use the same mechanics prevent the idea from being implimented (see burst fire ACs and the UAC2).

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Abivard, on 04 March 2014 - 08:51 AM, said:

Running out of ammo.

Overheating

Poor hit reg

Needs a direct line of sight.

If more people would look at the Forest as a whole instead of their favorite Tree, we could hopefully avoid so many Moot discussions.

1 applies to LRM's more than AC's, if you look at LRM mechs they spend WAY more tonnage on ammo.

2 also applies to LRM's, ghost heat actually hurts LRM's more than AC's currently. PPC's don't use ammo so I don't count them here.

3 also applies to LRM's, especially once you are using multiple large launchers.

4 also applies to LRM's. Indirect fire, to be frank, sucks. It only works against bad players. And you better hope those bad players don't have ECM.

Sooooo....what was your point?

[Kjudoon]

3rdworld, on 04 March 2014 - 06:41 AM, said:

To me the problems with LRMs is making a single launcher a viable addition to any mech, without making the OP when massed.

Such is the fact of every weapon, not just LRMs. PPCs, ACs, SRMs, Streaks.... Other than maybe... MAYBE MGs and Flamers, everything massed gets nastier to the point of OP in the right hands... or wrong hands.