383 replies to this topic

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Khobai, on 06 March 2014 - 12:09 PM, said:

Their top speed is 97kph in tabletop. I know they go 171kph in MWO. If a slow light gets a 76% increase in top speed why shouldnt a slow medium get the same benefit? Hunchbacks should go 111kph.

While I don't necessarily agree with the suggestion (and I'm not sure it isn't a facetious one), I do agree with the implied question.

Willard Phule, on 06 March 2014 - 12:10 PM, said:

Why is that? It doesn't have to change as long as people are willing to spend money to have them. Oh well, it's slower than IS mechs...doesn't have as good armor as IS...weapons are about the same.

Looks like "history" is going to change....the Clans are going to lose long before Tukyyid.

Or maybe, with no mixtech allowance, that's how it's going to pay for superior weapon tonnage/CHS efficiency.

Although that does bring up questions about the later-on IS Omnimechs.

Edited by Elli Gujar, 06 March 2014 - 12:16 PM.

[Almond Brown]

Abivard, on 06 March 2014 - 11:09 AM, said:

As far as I am aware, the LRM from TT outranged all other weapons, in MWO it outranges only a few weapons, among AC's only the AC20 has a shorter range.

LRM's may have had 40% increase, but ballistics received 200% range bonus and energy has 100% bonus.

let us get everything out in the open shall we.

Agreed, but let's also remember that the LRM is the only 1000m weapon that carries its total damage the whole distance. Very few other weapons have damage potential out to 1000m and that damage is minimal and or marginal at best.

Edited by Almond Brown, 06 March 2014 - 12:24 PM.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Almond Brown, on 06 March 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

Agreed, but let's also remember that the LRM is the only 1000m weapon that carries its total damage the whole distance. Only the AC2 and AC5 have damage potential out to 1000m and that damage is minimal and marginal at best.

...and the ERLL, which does damage to 1300, and the ERPPC which does more damage even farther, and the Gauss Rifle, which does more damage and even farther still. And of those five weapons, only three (ERPPC, Gauss, AC/2) are actually supposed to outrange LRMs, and only slightly (by no more than 1/7 the total range of LRMs)

Edited by Elli Gujar, 06 March 2014 - 12:24 PM.

[Khobai]

Anyways back to LRMs...

I personally think the following changes need to be made to LRMs:

-increase damage from 1.1 to 1.5 per missile because lrm just don't hit hard enough compared to ppcs or ac/10s.
-increase speed from 120m/s to 160m/s (33% speed increase and lrms can now chase 150kph lights better)
-significantly buff tag and artemis so that they give lrm buffs on par with the lrm nerfs that ecm and ams give.
-add ghost heat limit of 3-4 on lrm5s.

Quote

Agreed, but let's also remember that the LRM is the only 1000m weapon that carries its total damage the whole distance.

You won't hit someone at 1000m with LRMs unless they're completely oblivious to your missiles. Max effective range of LRMs is more like 500m because of the LRM warning and how slow they travel. Any farther than that and theres plenty of time to dodge them before they get there.

Edited by Khobai, 06 March 2014 - 12:28 PM.

[no one]

Ulysses Jacobi, on 26 February 2014 - 12:53 PM, said:

To balance LRMs, you need to make it much harder to have a single spotter without TAG, NARC, etc. provide targeting *snip*

Actually, that's a really good point. Right now, the chief complaints I see from each side tend towards -

Nerfers - Massed indirect LRM fire is too overwhelming.
Buffers - LRM systems are individually weak and have a low chance of success at long ranges.

If you restricted LRMs by either
1 - Requiring 'Mechs to declare who they are spotting for, or
2 - Setting it so one spotter allows for only one other teammate to hold a missile lock at the same time.

Then you could improve missile range or speed without making LRMs as a whole unbalanced.

Standard SRMs severely need help as well.

Edited by no one, 06 March 2014 - 12:40 PM.

[Artgathan]

Almond Brown, on 06 March 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

Agreed, but let's also remember that the LRM is the only 1000m weapon that carries its total damage the whole distance. Only the AC2 and AC5 have damage potential out to 1000m and that damage is minimal and marginal at best.

The ERPPC does damage ~7 damage at 100m, the Gauss Rifle does ~7 as well.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

And of course, we're blindly ignoring the fact that if you shoot LRM's at beyond 700m, it becomes a total crap shoot as to whether you do any damage with them.

It once again takes a TOTAL derp to get that missile warning at 700m and not react to it.

Khobai, on 06 March 2014 - 12:22 PM, said:

Anyways back to LRMs...

I personally think the following changes need to be made to LRMs:

-increase damage from 1.1 to 1.5 per missile because lrm just don't hit hard enough compared to ppcs or ac/10s.
-increase speed from 120m/s to 160m/s (33% speed increase and lrms can now outrun 150kph lights)
-significantly buff tag and artemis so that they give buffs on par with the nerfs that ecm and ams give.
-add ghost heat limit of 3-4 on lrm5s.

I'm pretty sure 120 m/s outruns a 150kph light unless i'm totally remembering wrong.

It's not the fact that they can't outrun 150kph lights, it's that they break trying to hit 150kph lights.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Almond Brown, on 06 March 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

Agreed, but let's also remember that the LRM is the only 1000m weapon that carries its total damage the whole distance. Very few other weapons have damage potential out to 1000m and that damage is minimal and or marginal at best.

Except that, unlike any of those other weapons, the LRM rarely actually deals its total damage at any range. Which is a very important factor in LRMs and is why they are intended to fill a niche of working at comparable ranges to those weapons under the same circumstances. And currently, they don't work at comparable ranges to those weapons, particularly given there are circumstances where LRMs are plain old useless that don't apply to those other weapons systems.

Edited by Elli Gujar, 06 March 2014 - 12:28 PM.

[Fut]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 March 2014 - 10:40 AM, said:

Here is the problem Fut....

It would be one thing if ECM was ALWAYS present, and everyone who had LRM's took TAG, and we always knew how many AMS would be present.

But we don't.

So once again, if someone takes a single LRM20 into a match...is it balanced?

Maybe if no ECM and no AMS is in the match.

But if ECM is in the match, a single LRM 20 is suddenly not balanced, because it basically becomes unusable unless you mounted TAG.

Except someone with a single LRM launcher shouldn't really need to take TAG to make their single launcher useful. It's pretty silly.

You can't balance with so many different variables in play.

Why would anybody want MWO to be so regimented?
LRMs always with TAG, ECM always present, knowing exactly how many AMS are present.

Part of the fun is the randomness of warfare. You should build a Mech that you believe you can handle well regardless of what you're up against, and regardless of where you drop. You should expect to run into difficult situations, you should expect to go up against difficult opponents - this is war, not a run through a field of flowers.

A single LRM20 is fine, even if it doesn't have TAG. Look for targets that aren't cloaked in ECM, look for targets that don't have AMS. This information is available to you once you're in battle. It's one of the reasons why target locks are so important.
If there are too many ECMs disrupting your locks, try to think of ways around that - Look for other targets, consider loading TAG or BAP. If there are too many AMS gobbling up your missiles - look for targets away from the AMS.

MWO is supposed to be a "thinking man's shooter", not just "run and gun at everything red".

If you happen to be in a match where there are tonnes of ECM, and tonnes of AMS, and you honestly believe that your LRMs are completely useless - well, you lost the MWO Lottery for the match. Try to think of other ways to support your team other than firing your LRMs. Or think of ways to alter your Mech Loadout to avoid a similar situation in the future (ie. other weapons besides LRMs, perhaps TAG, Artemis, BAP..etc). Learn from what is going on in each and every drop.

If you happen to be in a match where there are no ECM, and no AMS - You won the MWO Lottery for the match. Hurray! Enjoy the bliss of unfettered LRMs.

That's how I see the "Balance" of LRMs, on a match by match basis. Sometimes it feels incredibly tough to use them, but that only means that you're going up against opponents who've decided to specifically defend against your style of attack (good on them). Sometimes it feels like everybody forgot that LRMs even existed, and you can rain on your targets with little worry.
For the most part though, I find that it's somewhere in the middle. You see a couple ECMs in each match, you see the AMSes firing away in each match - but I've never been in a situation where I've felt completely useless.

[Khobai]

Quote

I'm pretty sure 120 m/s outruns a 150kph light unless i'm totally remembering wrong.

yeah they do. But most get shot down by ams.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Fut, on 06 March 2014 - 12:27 PM, said:

Why would anybody want MWO to be so regimented?
LRMs always with TAG, ECM always present, knowing exactly how many AMS are present.

Part of the fun is the randomness of warfare. You should build a Mech that you believe you can handle well regardless of what you're up against, and regardless of where you drop. You should expect to run into difficult situations, you should expect to go up against difficult opponents - this is war, not a run through a field of flowers.

A single LRM20 is fine, even if it doesn't have TAG. Look for targets that aren't cloaked in ECM, look for targets that don't have AMS. This information is available to you once you're in battle. It's one of the reasons why target locks are so important.
If there are too many ECMs disrupting your locks, try to think of ways around that - Look for other targets, consider loading TAG or BAP. If there are too many AMS gobbling up your missiles - look for targets away from the AMS.

MWO is supposed to be a "thinking man's shooter", not just "run and gun at everything red".

If you happen to be in a match where there are tonnes of ECM, and tonnes of AMS, and you honestly believe that your LRMs are completely useless - well, you lost the MWO Lottery for the match. Try to think of other ways to support your team other than firing your LRMs. Or think of ways to alter your Mech Loadout to avoid a similar situation in the future (ie. other weapons besides LRMs, perhaps TAG, Artemis, BAP..etc). Learn from what is going on in each and every drop.

If you happen to be in a match where there are no ECM, and no AMS - You won the MWO Lottery for the match. Hurray! Enjoy the bliss of unfettered LRMs.

That's how I see the "Balance" of LRMs, on a match by match basis. Sometimes it feels incredibly tough to use them, but that only means that you're going up against opponents who've decided to specifically defend against your style of attack (good on them). Sometimes it feels like everybody forgot that LRMs even existed, and you can rain on your targets with little worry.
For the most part though, I find that it's somewhere in the middle. You see a couple ECMs in each match, you see the AMSes firing away in each match - but I've never been in a situation where I've felt completely useless.

Which is why I only own one 'true' LRM boat and a couple of things that are 'kinda close'. But then, unlike most people who talk about playing this game, I'd rather always have some useless parts on my 'mech than sometimes have an entire useless 'mech.

[Fut]

Elli Gujar, on 06 March 2014 - 12:30 PM, said:

Which is why I only own one 'true' LRM boat and a couple of things that are 'kinda close'. But then, unlike most people who talk about playing this game, I'd rather always have some useless parts on my 'mech than sometimes have an entire useless 'mech.

Agreed. It makes sense to have a "Balanced Mech Loadout" capable of various methods of attack. 1 trick ponies can do great in some situations, but they're completely horrible in others.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Fut, on 06 March 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:

Agreed. It makes sense to have a "Balanced Mech Loadout" capable of various methods of attack. 1 trick ponies can do great in some situations, but they're completely horrible in others.

Now to convince you that my Cataphract 1X is amazing! Muhuhahaha.

((spoiler: I won't succeed))

Edited by Elli Gujar, 06 March 2014 - 01:03 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Fut, on 06 March 2014 - 12:27 PM, said:

Why would anybody want MWO to be so regimented?
LRMs always with TAG, ECM always present, knowing exactly how many AMS are present.

Part of the fun is the randomness of warfare. You should build a Mech that you believe you can handle well regardless of what you're up against, and regardless of where you drop. You should expect to run into difficult situations, you should expect to go up against difficult opponents - this is war, not a run through a field of flowers.

A single LRM20 is fine, even if it doesn't have TAG. Look for targets that aren't cloaked in ECM, look for targets that don't have AMS. This information is available to you once you're in battle. It's one of the reasons why target locks are so important.
If there are too many ECMs disrupting your locks, try to think of ways around that - Look for other targets, consider loading TAG or BAP. If there are too many AMS gobbling up your missiles - look for targets away from the AMS.

MWO is supposed to be a "thinking man's shooter", not just "run and gun at everything red".

If you happen to be in a match where there are tonnes of ECM, and tonnes of AMS, and you honestly believe that your LRMs are completely useless - well, you lost the MWO Lottery for the match. Try to think of other ways to support your team other than firing your LRMs. Or think of ways to alter your Mech Loadout to avoid a similar situation in the future (ie. other weapons besides LRMs, perhaps TAG, Artemis, BAP..etc). Learn from what is going on in each and every drop.

If you happen to be in a match where there are no ECM, and no AMS - You won the MWO Lottery for the match. Hurray! Enjoy the bliss of unfettered LRMs.

That's how I see the "Balance" of LRMs, on a match by match basis. Sometimes it feels incredibly tough to use them, but that only means that you're going up against opponents who've decided to specifically defend against your style of attack (good on them). Sometimes it feels like everybody forgot that LRMs even existed, and you can rain on your targets with little worry.
For the most part though, I find that it's somewhere in the middle. You see a couple ECMs in each match, you see the AMSes firing away in each match - but I've never been in a situation where I've felt completely useless.

Why are LRM's the ONLY weapon in the game that get's this treatment?

So you are cool if we add an item that makes PPC's useless?

Or an item that makes A/C's useless?

Luck of the draw! Drop in a map with a bunch of people with Magnetic Bullet Stopping Super Secret Shields, and your Autocannon's suck, better hope that they don't have the Blue Shield that blocks PPC's too, otherwise you are screwed!

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 March 2014 - 01:00 PM, said:

Why are LRM's the ONLY weapon in the game that get's this treatment?

So you are cool if we add an item that makes PPC's useless?

Or an item that makes A/C's useless?

Luck of the draw! Drop in a map with a bunch of people with Magnetic Bullet Stopping Super Secret Shields, and your Autocannon's suck, better hope that they don't have the Blue Shield that blocks PPC's too, otherwise you are screwed!

This is why I was of the understanding that we all think LRMs need some changes made. Was I wrong? Why are we backsliding in the argument here? What just happened? WHY IS PINEAPPLE UPSIDE-DOWN CAKE UPSIDE-DOWN!?!?!

Edited by Elli Gujar, 06 March 2014 - 01:02 PM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

For reference, LRM's are the ONLY weapon in this game that require "thought" to use.

Why does every other weapon to get to fire indiscriminately and have the expected outcome?

Whereas LRM's you have to hope and pray that the opposing team doesn't have 8 AMS and 4 ECM.

And even if they don't have a ton of AMS and ECM, you have to hope they aren't smart enough to understand how LRM's work and basically use cover to make your life miserable (which ALL of the good players know how to do).

So what? Instead of making LRM's work like other weapons, you want to make it so everything else is super complicated to use? Here's a tip, that ain't happening.

[Voivode]

Sandpit, on 26 February 2014 - 12:22 PM, said:

Since when does AMS destroy an entire flight of missiles? The ONLY time I see this is when you have multiples stacked up in a tight group somewhere. I can get hits on target with an LRM5 against AMS

Dual AMS on one mech is totally capable of whittling a flight from an LRM 15 to betwenn 0 and 3 missiles.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Elli Gujar, on 06 March 2014 - 01:02 PM, said:

This is why I was of the understanding that we all think LRMs need some changes made. Was I wrong? Why are we backsliding in the argument here? What just happened? WHY IS PINEAPPLE UPSIDE-DOWN CAKE UPSIDE-DOWN!?!?!

There a lot of people in this game who will say "Hey, I'm cool with giving LRM's a 30m/s speed boost" knowing full well it won't fix the underlying problems with LRM's. They say it because they don't like the concept behind LRM's and want them to continue sucking.

Voivode, on 06 March 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

Dual AMS on one mech is totally capable of whittling a flight from an LRM 15 to betwenn 0 and 3 missiles.

My Dual AMS Firestarter obliterates missiles...if you shoot two 15's in my vicinity between the spread that occurs with 30 missiles, my dual AMS, and if the guy is smart he's moving into cover or jump jetting to further mess with the missiles, you will be lucky to do 5 damage.

[Tiamat of the Sea]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 06 March 2014 - 01:08 PM, said:

There a lot of people in this game who will say "Hey, I'm cool with giving LRM's a 30m/s speed boost" knowing full well it won't fix the underlying problems with LRM's. They say it because they don't like the concept behind LRM's and want them to continue sucking.

I'm afraid I can't believe this because I can't believe that you are capable of reading peoples' minds. You're slipping into hyperbole, and in the process this topic is starting to degenerate towards shouting at each other again. Please don't.

That said, you do have a good point. LRMs and Streak SRMs are the only weapons out there with hard counters that are not counters to every weapon. I went over that in my giant post when I first got to this topic.

I want to be clear here, since apparently clarity is a bit lacking:

I quoted Fut because he explained one of the reasons why I do a thing. He described things as they are, not necessarily as I think they should be.

Unfortunately, the current state of the game is that anyone with LRMs can expect that any given target is currently or is about to be under either an ECM shield, a mass AMS umbrella, or both.

I don't think this is right, but I don't think yelling at Fut (which is functionally what you are doing, Nic) that he would think differently in a different situation is going to help anybody.

Frankly, Fut, I don't think the current state of LRMs (being useful or not entirely dependent on factors that can't even remotely be predicted by the player choosing to bring them) is good. But I do acknowledge that it is the way that it is, and without significant overhauls to ECM and AMSes, it is unlikely that this will change.

This is precisely why I declared I don't want to discuss changing ECM anymore. I'm not going to gain any traction, I've already heard all the arguments on both sides and decided my point of view based on that information, and nobody seems to be bringing anything new to the table on that count. Besides, as was pointed out, PGI has declared that they aren't going to look at changing ECM.

I will tell you that I think ECM should be changed, but I don't expect it to happen. So, other than reiterating that I think it should be changed (not nerfed), I'm not ready to discuss it anymore in a topic that's not primarily about ECM. I'm also going to go as far as to say that I don't think anyone should be discussing making changes to ECM in this topic anymore, because every time it gets brought up, someone degenerates to hyperbole and the internet equivalent of yelling at someone else and we make no progress at all, nor rational discourse.

So forget the ECM.

What (other) current problems are we looking at with LRMs?

First off, they're not fast enough at their longer firing ranges to actually reach the target in a reasonable amount of time.

Next, their travel arc is sometimes fine and sometimes abysmally stupid, as is their pathing (see 'rooster tail lights').

C.) Dumb-firing LRMs is essentially meaningless unless your target is shut down or disconnected. By contrast, firing them after lock on and wanting them to hit means restricting your own movements even for direct fire, which is a restriction no other weapon has.

4: Missile clusters are so large for the bigger racks that many or even most of the missiles get wasted against smaller targets.

Finally- Because of these factors, they don't operate at the range window they're supposed to be filling (niches, not numbers) compared to other long-range weapons, they're anywhere from bad to meaningless against a target moving over about 100kph (not a deliberately picked number, I'm sure someone could math out the cutoff), and using them against light 'mechs is an excercise in futility unless they're assisted by extra gear and the tube count is five or less.

So far we all agree that the speed-up is a good idea (for the sake of hitting long range targets, since it won't really change their functionality against high-speed light 'mechs all that much). Something may need to be done about missile convergence (LRMs vs. light 'mechs, both moving and not). Most people (who have posted since I proposed the idea) seem to like the concept of having two different flight paths (to make direct fire and fire under ceilings more viable- not necessarily more powerful, but more viable). I would very much like to see a change to LRM direct fire so that the lock-on doesn't need to be held there, but needs to be held for indirect fire- that makes the cost of 'maintaining lock' entirely an onus on indirect fire, which is where it belongs if indeed it belongs anywhere. Particularly since, after some exercise in my Streak SRM Stalker, I can say with confidence that Streak missiles don't require you to maintain the lock-on after you fire them.

-QKD-CR0

Edited by Elli Gujar, 06 March 2014 - 01:35 PM.

[Willard Phule]

Voivode, on 06 March 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

Dual AMS on one mech is totally capable of whittling a flight from an LRM 15 to betwenn 0 and 3 missiles.

....especially with the new ams range module. I shoot down LRM5s by myself now and put a serious hurting on 10s.