383 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

As a starting point Id like to to see LRM range increased to 120m/s to 150m/s and AMS range increased from 200m to 250m.

That makes LRMs 25% faster and gives AMS 25% longer range. So AMS is still just as effective vs LRMs but also better against Streaks (which is needed since AMS barely shoots down any Streaks at all right now).

Quote

Missiles should be balanced without the other electronics.

Agreed. Unless matchmaker can guarantee both teams have ECM it makes no sense to balance LRMs around the assumption the other team has ECM. But quite frankly ECM should have no effect on LRMs anyway other than increasing lock-on time.

Edited by Khobai, 26 February 2014 - 03:36 PM.

[Lightfoot]

Nah, forget it, just keep them a little hard to use like they are now. They work decently, but if you sped them up the LRMs-are-cheating crowd would have a cow.

[Willard Phule]

Livewyr, on 26 February 2014 - 03:32 PM, said:

LRMs should be balanced without the mitigating/enhancing factors in mind. This way, those effects are just what they should be- enhancing, or mitigating. (One very important caveat: ECM needs to NOT be an off switch, and BAP shouldn't have to be an on switch. It is impossible to balance LRMs when there are devices required to make them entirely useless, or useful at all.)

LRMs, alone, should be balanced for when dealing with a mech that doesn't have mitigating gear. So when you spend the cbills, weight, and space to make them more powerful with Artemis, they are just that- more powerful. One shouldn't have to spend weight and space to just make them balanced.

Missiles should speed up, just a little more- and have the spread equivalent to an atlas upper body. *(Maybe minus the arms, maybe.)
Artemis should tighten the group, with LoS.
AMS should be toned down to reduce damage from LRMs, but not be able to completely nullify LRMx40 barrage with 3 AMS systems.
ECM should have an effect of increasing the spread, or making a variable percentage miss, and cancel out Artemis. Not remove locking-ability. (That's what stealth armor is for.) It should nullify BAP.
BAP should increase the range of locking, and shorten the lock time, as it does- it should not have to counter ECM's shutoff.
TAG should be required for calling in artillery/air strikes- and for aiding in artillery missiles should they ever arrive.
Adv. Target Decay should do exactly what it's doing. It's an extra piece of equipment, taking up a slot, to specialize for a mech carrying missiles.
NARC should be attached to the component where it hits, and remain there for 45 seconds or until the component where it landed is destroyed. NARC should have no impact on Artemis LRMs.

TL;DR:
Missiles should be balanced without the other electronics.
Other electronics should be balanced between their costs(empirical and meta) vs their effectiveness.

We already have the issue where DHS is a requirement to be competitive- which can be solved but hasn't.
We don't want missiles to go the same route.

Again, man, the #1 reason people are whining about LRMs and increasing the speed is because THEY INTRODUCED AN ALRM60 BOAT TO THE TRIAL MECHS. Sure, it's all fine and dandy when the noobs don't bother to lock targets or fire them under the minimum range but......the minute those drooling, crosseyed mongoloids figure out how to hit the "R" button and chainfire the ALRM15s....you've got an LRMpocolypse on your hands. Better whine about it.

You wanna know how to defeat 4 noobs that actually know how to lock targets and manage their heat while filling the sky with LRMs from their Trial Stalkers?

1 ) Make sure you have AMS. 2) STAY WITH THE TEAM AND LET EVERYONE'S AMS WORK TOGETHER. 3) Stop being a dumbass and running across an open field with no cover and letting all the LRM boats on their team target you. What the hell do you think would happen to you if you jumped into a group of 5 Brawlers? They'd just pat you on the ass, explain your mistake to you and send you back to your team? Seriously. Get real, people.

Speed up the damn LRMs. Make is so the light mechs can't outrun them...for crying out loud, how can a humanoid robot with synthetic muscles generate enough speed to outrun a solid fuel missile? Tell ya what, if you question this logic, come over to my house and I'll let you try to outrun a bottle rocket....there's the scientific process for ya.

Lightfoot, on 26 February 2014 - 03:34 PM, said:

Nah, forget it, just keep them a little hard to use like they are now. They work decently, but if you sped them up the LRMs-are-cheating crowd would have a cow.

Most of the "LRMs are cheating" crowd are the light pilots that run around out in the open and when they find out they can't outrun every single missile, they cry. Whatever. Go back to piloting a Spider and take advantage of the buggy hitboxes.

Edited by Willard Phule, 26 February 2014 - 03:40 PM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Mechwarrior Mousse, on 26 February 2014 - 02:24 PM, said:

Assuming individual LRM volleys are a cloud with a set amount of health and that damage to that cloud / health per missile = the number of missiles shot down, then yes reducing the health of LRMs would be a good tradeoff without throwing the status quo of the other missiles vs AMS out the window.

If not, then yeah I can kind of see that would be a tricky thing to adjust as any change to AMS then necessitates a change in health or speed to all the other missiles.

Well, here's what we know about AMS:

Spoiler

Quote

From Breakdown - AMS - ANTI MISSILE SYSTEM

Does 3.5 damage per second to missiles.
All missiles have 1 hitpoint, except the NARC which has 2.
The range of the AMS is 200m.

Allied AMS work together to shoot down the same missiles in most situations.

Your AMS has priority against missiles that are locked onto you. Anything else is secondary.

So if a LRM is moving at 120m / sec at and you are stationary, in a perfect world, the AMS may shoot down about 6 LRMs in that volley.
So 4 Allied AMS should be able to shoot down a whole LRM20 volley.

Your velocity and direction compared to that of the missiles dictates how many missiles you can shoot down.

The AMS system updates (get new missiles list) every 0.5s so that also have an effect on how many are shot down.

Works against all missiles : LRM, SRM, SSRM, NARC.

So range, DPS, system updates and maybe even ammo per ton for AMS should be tweaked first.

Then adjusting missile hitpoints from there might be enough, depending on how missile velocity interacts, because SRMs and SSRMs could also use a boost to velocity.



The headache comes with trying to deal with LRM boating, (which is ironic, since we have a champion Stalker boating LRMs), and to me, boating should be handled as a separate concern from increasing LRM velocity, since boating in general is an issue overall anyway.

[Livewyr]

Willard, I'm trying to figure out why you quoted me there..you sound like you're disagreeing.. but then agree?

[Wolfways]

People still use AMS?

[Antonio]

The reason why LRM speed decreasing the effect of AMS is relevant is that it makes that 1.5 tons even more useless compared to ECM. I think they should try increasing LRM speed until it reaches within about 150-100m of the target and then slows down. This way AMS will still work and the flight time will be shorter.

Edited by Antonio, 26 February 2014 - 04:35 PM.

[topgun505]

True, in regards to ECM. But also in MWO you effectively have a fully functioning C3 network (which you don't even need to spend crit slots or tonnage for, unlike in TT) between all friendly units giving you targeting data and you don't even need a clear LOS to a friendly unit to get said data so it is FAR easier to do an indirect shot in MWO than in TT so some additional detractors are needed to balance that out.

You want ECM to not be a blanket cloak? Fine. Then get rid of the automatic friendly data-feeds that aren't LOS.

THEN maybe scout mechs will actually have a role.

Cimarb, on 26 February 2014 - 02:19 PM, said:

I would like a speed tweak to LRMs, but fixing ECM would be a much better solution across the board. ECM was never meant to be a complete block to LRMs, and should instead just reduce the lock on time and negate the bonuses of other systems, such as Artemis.

Edited by topgun505, 26 February 2014 - 04:19 PM.

[Willard Phule]

Incorrect. ECM was designed to completely block any "lockon" of anything...within a 180m bubble. Another ECM can shut that down, however.

The downside is that ECM used to be allowed on ANY mech...we're stuck with whatever PGI decides should have it or not. If ECM was available, then EVERYONE would have it....and half the team would be set to 'counter' mode.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Look, I don't really care what anyone's interpretation of ECM is supposed to be.

Purely from a balancing and fun game mechanic perspective. It completely sucks, is unrealistic for it's weight/tonnage/ease of use compared to every other item in the game, and makes LRM's totally impossible to balance.

If LRM's are balanced with no ECM, they must by virtue of what ECM does, suck when 1 or more ECM are on the battlefield.

It's very simple logic.

So ECM needs to go.

[Khobai]

Quote

So ECM needs to go.

Agreed. The main problem is the super stealth bubble. At *most* ECM should only stealth the mech its equipped on and should not stealth the entire team. That would be an acceptable compromise if PGI has no plans for adding stealth in other forms like NSS or stealth armor. If PGI does intend to add NSS or stealth armor than ECM should not give any stealth at all. ECM should also not prevent missile locks. However increasing missile lock-on time does make sense IMO.

Edited by Khobai, 26 February 2014 - 04:39 PM.

[Nothing Whatsoever]

topgun505, on 26 February 2014 - 04:18 PM, said:

True, in regards to ECM. But also in MWO you effectively have a fully functioning C3 network (which you don't even need to spend crit slots or tonnage for, unlike in TT) between all friendly units giving you targeting data and you don't even need a clear LOS to a friendly unit to get said data so it is FAR easier to do an indirect shot in MWO than in TT so some additional detractors are needed to balance that out.

You want ECM to not be a blanket cloak? Fine. Then get rid of the automatic friendly data-feeds that aren't LOS.

THEN maybe scout mechs will actually have a role.

Yeah, we do get tons of info for free during a match.

For a new player, it's a lot to take in, to use properly; and for experienced MWO players, it gives us a huge edge.

There's a lot already in the game that could be reassigned for Information Warfare aspects to be expanded upon to have a greater role in the game and could also be made more exclusive for IS mechs that would need to invest into the necessary equipment.

And it may be possible for CW, where one of the benefits that Clanners will have during their Invasion over the IS, is having such info available, while IS players would have to salvage and earn such equipment then need to invest into them to be able to use them.

One example is how the Targeting Computer could be setup; we already have something like that with the paper doll of the targeted enemy we currently get, so setting that paper doll as available only with a Targeting Computer, for example, and match dynamics could be very different and hopefully for the better.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Khobai, on 26 February 2014 - 04:36 PM, said:

The problem is the super stealth bubble. At *most* ECM should only stealth the mech its equipped on and should not stealth the whole team. That would be an acceptable compromise if PGI has no plans for adding stealth in other forms like NSS or stealth armor.

I personally feel like they need to stop making defensive items work for the whole team. It once again makes balancing super hard.

LRM's vs 1 or 2 AMS (for dual mounting mechs) is workable. Not perfect for balancing...but workable.

LRM's vs a whole team with AMS? Freaking ridiculously stupid.

Same problem goes for ECM.

LRM's vs. a mech with a personal ECM bubble...no biggie, you'll have other targets.

LRM's vs. a mech with ECM that shrouds the whole team? Starts to get really hard to balance. Especially when ECM stacks.

[Khobai]

Quote

LRM's vs a whole team with AMS? Freaking ridiculously stupid.

So you think AMS should only fire at missiles that are locked-on to you specifically?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Khobai, on 26 February 2014 - 04:40 PM, said:

So you think AMS should only fire at missiles that are locked-on to you specifically?

Why not? It's not perfect, but it makes it easier to balance.

The problem is...LRM's have SO many variables, that every drop can be completely different.

If I drop against newer players, with no AMS and no ECM, I'm a god.

If I drop against average players with no AMS and no ECM I'm still in really good shape.

If I drop against a group of players that has 6+ AMS, and one or two ECM...well damn I'm screwed.

It's just totally random. You can't balance LRM's to be able to work against 6 Assisting AMS and 2 ECM, because then when you run into a group with no AMS and no ECM they get obliterated which causes stupid threads calling to nerf LRM's.

(Keep in mind, I'm simplifying a bit)

But basically my standpoint is...if you are going to have AMS...make it work for that person. If they want to invest the tonnage, they get the benefit.

If someone wants ECM...they can equip ECM and get the benefit.

It's easier to balance that way. Much easier.

[DocBach]

topgun505, on 26 February 2014 - 04:18 PM, said:

True, in regards to ECM. But also in MWO you effectively have a fully functioning C3 network (which you don't even need to spend crit slots or tonnage for, unlike in TT) between all friendly units giving you targeting data and you don't even need a clear LOS to a friendly unit to get said data so it is FAR easier to do an indirect shot in MWO than in TT so some additional detractors are needed to balance that out.

You want ECM to not be a blanket cloak? Fine. Then get rid of the automatic friendly data-feeds that aren't LOS.

THEN maybe scout mechs will actually have a role.

This isn't true - Battlemechs are capable of sharing targeting information. C3's shared ALL information between a network, and actually made targeting more accurate based on the position of a spotter (negated range penalities).

According to the Tech Manual:

Quote

BattleMechs are also not islands unto themselves. They can share sensor data to some extent, allowing greater sensory performance than a single ’Mech can achieve. The specialized equipment of a C3 system takes this to new heights with direct battlefield applications, but all BattleMechs can at least receive basic sensory data from a unit mate.

Right now you can only share targeting data for the 'Mech you have targeted - a C3 system would share your radar data with your C3 linked team mates, regardless of what you had targeted. Improving accuracy could be interpreted with quicker lock times for 'Mechs on a C3 network who are firing upon an enemy a spotter has targeted.

Since C3 does not exist in this game, however, I'd say that blocking targeting information from a 'Mech inside or on the other side of an ECM bubble would be a fair penalty.

[Willard Phule]

Oh oh...here's a great idea and it'll stop ALL the whining....I want a module that makes the other team shoot at someone other than me. Doesn't matter what the weapon is. I want the "please don't hurt me, I'm elite" module....then all missiles, AC rounds and lasers go to someone else. Then I can be "leet."

This whole thread is crap.

Someone..anyone...explain to me why a light mech can outrun LRMs. Explain to me why a SOLID FUEL ROCKET isn't as fast as a 20-30 ton humanoid robot with synthetic muscles.

When I shoot an LRM launcher at ANY mech...I should expect at least something to hit if I've got a lock. It's bad enough that I can Alpha 80+ points of damage at a Spider at point-blank range and he only takes 5 points of it....it sucks, but it's a known factor and I accept it....but if I launch 60 FREAKING MISSILES at someone...I expect them to take damage, unless they're all grouped up and have a crap ton of AMS. Y'know?

The AMS is fine the way it is...in fact, it's a little overpowered considering it's a machinegun with a radar targeting unit...Hell, MGs don't do 3.5 damage...but, whatever.

If you group up with 5 other guys with AMS, you're good. IF YOU RUN OUT IN THE OPEN LIKE A FREAKING MONGOLOID, YOU DESERVE TO BE PUNISHED FOR YOUR STUPIDITY. Learn to operate as a team or get dead. It's part of that whole learning curve thing.

Whatever, I'm done with this. I need a beer.

Edited by Willard Phule, 26 February 2014 - 05:49 PM.

[Lyoto Machida]

SirLANsalot, on 26 February 2014 - 02:11 PM, said:

hmm.


Then I guess my LRM boat Protector games last night were a fluke.
LRM20 and LRM10 twin LL and Tag with Artemis. 11tons of ammo. Was getting 200-300 damage a game when I hit with just LRMs, and some games was getting 400-600 when the LL were getting used along side the LRM bombardment. People have severely underestimated the power that is an LRM20 with Art and Tag.....turns people mechs all kinds of colors.


Those games were just with TWO launchers....TWO.....not 3 or 4 that other, bigger, mechs have.......

200-300 damage for an LRM 30 with 11 tons is good??? Isn't this kinda killing your own argument?

Why not just throw on ACs and double your damage output?

[Sandpit]

I'm just curious about something

For all those saying LRMs are rare, why is it we have threads talking about how LRMs are ruling the battlefield?

[Lyoto Machida]

Sandpit, on 26 February 2014 - 06:12 PM, said:

I'm just curious about something

For all those saying LRMs are rare, why is it we have threads talking about how LRMs are ruling the battlefield?

Because people play in different ELO brackets?