245 replies to this topic

[Appogee]

Ghost Badger, on 20 March 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

Yeah, you can indirectly fire them. And spread your damage. They're still slower than direct-fire weapons, and there's a variety of pieces of equipment that can go from negating them partially to fully.

Actually, surprisingly, no. An LRM boat firing a salvo of 50 can potentially* do more than 12DPS. And bigger LRM boats do more DPS than that.

Compare that to a pair of AC20s (10DPS) 3 AC2s (10 and a bit) 2 AC5 (6.7) and 2 PPCs (5). Plus, ghost heat will prevent firing earlier on the ACs and PPCs than it will on the LRM boat, for a lower amount of potential damage.

With regard to "equipment that can go from negating them partially to fully", don't forget there are MORE dedicated technologies to assist them: TAG, NARC, various Target Modules, BAP, Artemis.

LRMs needed a buff. Personally I think they went a little too far. But it's too early to know for certain.

Ghost Badger, on 20 March 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:

Pre-patch I DID see lances uses coordinated LRM's to decent effect.

And THAT's exactly why I always said ""LRMs weren't useless". I've often seen good lances - combinations of spotters and boats - completely clean up in games, even before the speed buff. Used thoughtfully, they were effective already. Used thoughtlessly, much less so.




* It will be pointed out that not all LRMs hit their target. That's true. But it's also true of ballistics and PPC accuracies. LRMs and all other weapons suffer - to varying degrees - in being <100% accurate.

Edited by Appogee, 20 March 2014 - 08:48 AM.

[AlmightyAeng]

Appogee, on 20 March 2014 - 07:45 AM, said:

I agree, and what I said. Kill all boating, actually. I think though that some people are in love with their LRM boats and won't countenance limits being placed on their tubes.

Kill all boating? Hmm...

How about a low capacity, high dissipation heat system that discourages alpha-striking but allows you to boat things when fired in sequence?

I still get pissed about how PGI paid no attention to Homeless Bill's ideas for convergence.

The fact is PGI has CHOSEN their framework...it'd be nice if each weapon system was equally viable IN that poorly chosen framework. For me, this patch brought LRM's more in line with what WAS the dominant reigning meta (and I'd argue still is, from my games in my normal, mostly played direct-fire mechs last night).

[Appogee]

Ghost Badger, on 20 March 2014 - 08:52 AM, said:

How about a low capacity, high dissipation heat system that discourages alpha-striking but allows you to boat things when fired in sequence?

Yep, I'd be in that.

Ghost Badger, on 20 March 2014 - 08:52 AM, said:

I still get pissed about how PGI paid no attention to Homeless Bill's ideas for convergence.

They said it wasn't technically possible. Having thought about the algorithms necessary to implement it, I can see it would have put a HUGE load on the server so, sadly, probably not a viable solution.

[AlmightyAeng]

Appogee, on 20 March 2014 - 08:42 AM, said:

Actually, surprisingly, no. An LRM boat firing a salvo of 50 can potentially* do more than 12DPS. And bigger LRM boats do more DPS than that.

Appogee, you're smarter than this (no really, I appreciate the intelligent discourse without devolving in poor grammar and insults!). The point I made was that LRM's spread damage over components. By a lot. I didn't mention DPS at all.

Quote

Compare that to a pair of AC20s (10DPS) 3 AC2s (10 and a bit) 2 AC5 (6.7) and 2 PPCs (5). Plus, ghost heat will prevent firing earlier on the ACs and PPCs than it will on the LRM boat, for a lower amount of potential damage.

You're comparing potential DPS? When have LRM's EVER delivered a full payload? That hit percentage you're so intent on saying means nothing? Wrong. Even without AMS, or ECM, missiles never all hit the target. I'd argue that 'potential' max damage and DPS is the meaningless number, and that number gets smaller with every system used against it.

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, a highly skilled player uses both systems. They put their crosshairs on the target with a pinpoint weapon. It hits, and does 100% of the damage it's supposed to. Now they fire LRM's, their crosshair is still on the target. Those LRM's will NOT do 100% of their "potential" damage. For the people arguing that LRM's don't require skill to use? Guess what...having "twitch" skill doesn't make them any BETTER either.

Quote

With regard to "equipment that can go from negating them partially to fully", don't forget there are MORE dedicated technologies to assist them: TAG, NARC, various Target Modules, BAP, Artemis

Hence my comment "partially to fully." It depends on what everyone is bringing. Please note that it CAN be completely negated, but will never be 100% full effective (like a direct-fire weapon hitting).

Quote

LRMs needed a buff. Personally I think they went a little too far. But it's too early to know for certain.

The next 2 weeks will tell us a lot. I'm not sure they went too far, but we'll see

Quote

And THAT's exactly why I always said ""LRMs weren't useless". I've often seen good lances - combinations of spotters and boats - completely clean up in games, even before the speed buff. Used thoughtfully, they were effective already. Used thoughtlessly, much less so.

Yeah, they weren't FLAMER bad...but, skill being equal, they WERE disproportionately worse compared to ballistics, ppcs and lasers.

Quote

* It will be pointed out that not all LRMs hit their target. That's true. But it's also true of ballistics and PPC accuracies. LRMs and all other weapons suffer - to varying degrees - in being <100% accurate.

Yes, and like I said up above, skill being equal, LRM's are still less accurate. I can be a badass with ballistics and PPC and wreck face...but I can only be so accurate with LRM's. You can't guarantee those hits, and if you look at the mid-range to top tier peoples' percentages, I think it'd support my statement. Mine does. Feel free to use numbers and prove me wrong.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 20 March 2014 - 09:06 AM.

[Appogee]

Ghost Badger, on 20 March 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

The point I made was that LRM's spread damage over components. By a lot. I didn't mention DPS at all.

Yes. My point was that higher DPS offsets to some extent the fact that the damage spreads. For example, if you lob 50 missiles and 10 of them land on the CT, that's 11 damage. If you can do that 11 damage faster, then you're overall doing more useful damage. (I appreciate that this wasn't clear from my brief post.)

Ghost Badger, on 20 March 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

You're comparing potential DPS? When have LRM's EVER delivered a full payload?

You missed the "*" and footnote that I added in 6pt type at the bottom (I did that because I didn't want to clutter up the main point with side points.)

Ghost Badger, on 20 March 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

Let's assume, for the sake of argument, a highly skilled player uses both systems. They put their crosshairs on the target with a pinpoint weapon. It hits, and does 100% of the damage it's supposed to. Now they fire LRM's, their crosshair is still on the target. Those LRM's will NOT do 100% of their "potential" damage.

Sometimes the pinpoint weapon will hit. Sometimes it will miss completely ... because the target jinked, or changed speed, or jumped, or the shooter's cockpit shook due to incoming missiles or AC fire. Sometimes it will do partial damage due to range limitations, or in the case of lasers, ''spraying'' across a Light's legs.

I'm not saying they're equivalent situations, only that there are limitations on all weapon accuracies which all have to be taken into account.

And, because the LRM boat starts with the highest DPS, and its rate of fire remains affected by ghost heat more than other high ROF weapons (eg AC2), it can potentially ''afford'' to lose some damage due to inaccuracy.

Ghost Badger, on 20 March 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

For the people arguing that LRM's don't require skill to use? Guess what...having "twitch" skill doesn't make them any BETTER either.

I believe LRMs don't require skill to ''use''... but they do require skill to ''use well''.

Edited by Appogee, 20 March 2014 - 09:16 AM.

[AlmightyAeng]

Appogee,

I think we're just not seeing eye-to-eye on the "potential" for direct-fire vs. indirect fire weapons.

Yes, you CAN miss with direct-fire weapons. But, assuming a "hit," that direct-fire will do it's intended damage (for weapon damage at X distance, if it hits it WILL do Y damage). LRM's will ALWAYS do a partial percentage of their potential damage.

That makes them inferior from the get-go at higher levels of play.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 20 March 2014 - 09:18 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Normally I'm a huge LRM boat hater, but the past couple days I've found that if I am on my game (not super tired or distracted or anything else that will lower my ability to concentrate) it is easy to be aware of my team and the cover near by and I don't really get that messed up by LRMs, even with this speed boost. I think the speed boost might be a tad too high, but it isn't breaking the game. If one starts to lose concentration and step too far out of cover, they will completely gore you. I'd be lying if I said it didn't frustrate me when I see 4 streams of 60 LRMs each raining down on my slow poke assault mech, fired from mechs that I can't even see. At that point you might as well just power down and quit.

But anyway my point is that it is easy to avoid LRM fire, just as it is easy to avoid poptart meta fire (I would argue easier, they require LoS all you have to do is stay behind cover, no brainer). The negative impact I see is that when a team has a lot of LRM boats, the match turns into this stale waiting game a lot more than it did before this last patch. It is a little boring to sit for 7-8 minutes not doing anything because the second you step out you get gored by LRMs... but it does not turn out that way EVERY time. I'm for waiting it out to see what happens when people are done trying out LRMs. I'm hoping they won't be used that much on a regular basis.

[Appogee]

Ghost Badger, on 20 March 2014 - 09:17 AM, said:

Yes, you CAN miss with direct-fire weapons. But, assuming a "hit," that direct-fire will do it's intended damage (for weapon damage at X distance, if it hits it WILL do Y damage). LRM's will ALWAYS do a partial percentage of their potential damage.

But why would we assume PPCs 100% hit? They don't, any more than 100% of LRMs hit. Perhaps some maths will illustrate my point:

Pilot A is using LRM60,
Pilot B is using a pair of PPCs.
Pilot C is using a trio of AC5s.

Pilot A has a maximum potential damage of 13.9DPS.
Pilot B has a maximum potential damage of 5 DPS.

Both pilots are attacking a moving target who is 500m from them. The target is jinking, trying to avoid incoming fire.

Pilot A lands half his LRMs on target, giving him a real DPS of 7.
Pilot B lands 80% of his shots (probably a too generous hit rate) giving him a real DPS of 4.

LRM boat does almost twice the damage of the PPC and AC users!

Now, both pilots are attacking a moving target who is 800m from them. And they're both taking incoming fire from ACs.

Pilot A can still shoot while being buffeted. He still lands half his LRMs on target, giving him a real DPS of 7.
Pilot B's hit rate falls to 50%, due to buffeting. And his PPCs only do half damage at 800m. His real DPS is now only 1.25!

LRM boat is doing more than 5 times the damage of the PPC user!

Now, both pilots keep firing.

Pilot A is doing 3.78 heat per second.
Pilot B is doing 5 heat per second... even though he is chain firing to try to limit ghost heat.

Pilot B has to stop firing his PPCs sooner, as he hits the heat threshold sooner. Pilot A keeps firing for longer.

So, despite the LRM boat having a higher DPS to start with, it's now even higher, because it can keeping firing after the PPC user is forced to stop!


I think this illustrates why DPS should be a relevant consideration in the whole ''are LRMs balanced or not'' discussion.

Edited by Appogee, 20 March 2014 - 09:58 AM.

[Green Mamba]

Game Is doomed ...Too many White Knighters Rushing to Slurp on PGI

[Varent]

Appogee, on 20 March 2014 - 09:49 AM, said:

But why would we assume PPCs 100% hit? They don't, any more than 100% of LRMs hit. Perhaps some maths will illustrate my point:

Pilot A is using LRM60,
Pilot B is using a pair of PPCs.

Pilot A has a maximum potential damage of 13.9DPS.
Pilot B has a maximum potential damage of 5 DPS.

Both pilots are attacking a moving target who is 500m from them. The target is jinking, trying to avoid incoming fire.

Pilot A lands half his LRMs on target, giving him a real DPS of 7.
Pilot B lands 80% of his shots on the target (probably a too generous hit rate) giving him a real DPS of 4.

LRM boat does almost twice the damage of the PPC user!

Now, both pilots are attacking a moving target who is 800m from them. And they're both taking incoming fire from ACs.

Pilot A can still shoot while being buffeted. He still lands half his LRMs on target, giving him a real DPS of 7.
Pilot B's hit rate falls to 50%, due to buffeting. And his PPCs only do half damage at 800m. His real DPS is now only 1.25!

LRM boat is doing almost 5 times the damage of the PPC user!

Now, both pilots keep firing.

Pilot A is doing 3.78 heat per second.
Pilot B is doing 5 heat per second... even though he is chain firing to limit ghost heat.

Pilot B has to stop firing his PPCs sooner, due to hitting the heat threshold. Pilot A keeps firing, for longer.

So, despite the LRM boat's having a higher DPS over time to start with, it's now even higher, because the LRM boat can keeping firing after the PPC user is forced to stop!


I think this illustrates why DPS should be a relevant consideration in the whole ''are LRMs balanced or not'' discussion.

Your entire post ignored one major thing.

Effective damage.

The ppc user is able to direct his fire, the LRM boat user is not able to.

While the LRM boat may be getting more damage the PPC user gets his damage exactly where he wants it. That means with aim you can focus all your fire in one area potentially.

The strength of being able to aim a weapon is AMAZINGLY high.

This is where the balance comes from.

[Joseph Mallan]

Green Mamba, on 20 March 2014 - 09:51 AM, said:

Game Is doomed ...Too many White Knighters Rushing to Slurp on PGI

Just remember Buddy

Not all White Knights are made the same!

Truly a shame that a image of goodness and strength has become an insult!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 20 March 2014 - 09:57 AM.

[Varent]

Green Mamba, on 20 March 2014 - 09:51 AM, said:

Game Is doomed ...Too many White Knighters Rushing to Slurp on PGI

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Honestly this has been one case where it isn't White Knights vs. PGI Naysayers.

If you look at it, it's predominantly experienced players/posters vs. new posters/new players/LRM haters.

Sandpit and I almost never agree on anything. But we are on the same side this time.

[Varent]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 20 March 2014 - 09:59 AM, said:

Honestly this has been one case where it isn't White Knights vs. PGI Naysayers.

If you look at it, it's predominantly experienced players/posters vs. new posters/new players/LRM haters.

Sandpit and I almost never agree on anything. But we are on the same side this time.

pretty much ya. Seems all the major posters are getting along and agreeing.

Wich is.... wierd....

[FupDup]

Varent, on 20 March 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

Your entire post ignored one major thing.

Effective damage.

The ppc user is able to direct his fire, the LRM boat user is not able to.

While the LRM boat may be getting more damage the PPC user gets his damage exactly where he wants it. That means with aim you can focus all your fire in one area potentially.

The strength of being able to aim a weapon is AMAZINGLY high.

This is where the balance comes from.

He also ignored weapon tonnage.


2 PPCs = 14 tons and 6 slots minimum. Most "meta" builds use 14 DHS with this so that brings it up to 18 tons and varying slots (depending on how many sinks your engine can hold).

3 LRM20 = 30 tons and 15 slots minimum. You're also probably going to want at least 7-8 tons of ammo, which brings the weight to 38+ tons and 23+ slots.


That is a mighty huge difference in terms of loadout investment. That Lurmboat has to dedicate his entire mech to one thing, whereas the PPC guy can carry plenty of backup weapons for any situation. Also, the PPC user has the ability to make snapshots, whereas the Lurmboat has to stay facing the target to maintain his lock.

[Appogee]

Varent, on 20 March 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

Effective damage.

I agree it's a factor.

But look at the 800m scenario. Can a PPC user reliably land his 80% of shots on one component of a jinking target at that range, while he is taking incoming fire? I doubt it. Even if he can, he is still doing one sixth the damage of the LRM boat. The LRM boat is still way ahead.

Now look at the 500M scenario. The target is moving about, as targets do. Can a PPC user reliably land his 80% of shots on one component of a jinking target at that range? Sure, he will land some of them. But then, most targets are smart enough to cover their damaged components, too. Regardless, the PPC user still has to land heaps more shots - and before he hits his heat threshold - to compensate for the fact that he's only doing half the DPS of the LRM Boat.

So I don't think factoring in ''aimed shots'' actually negates my examples.

[CeeKay Boques]

Appogee, on 20 March 2014 - 09:49 AM, said:

But why would we assume PPCs 100% hit? They don't, any more than 100% of LRMs hit. Perhaps some maths will illustrate my point:

Pilot A is using LRM60,
Pilot B is using a pair of PPCs.
Pilot C is using a trio of AC5s.

Pilot A has a maximum potential damage of 13.9DPS.
Pilot B has a maximum potential damage of 5 DPS.

Both pilots are attacking a moving target who is 500m from them. The target is jinking, trying to avoid incoming fire.

Pilot A lands half his LRMs on target, giving him a real DPS of 7.
Pilot B lands 80% of his shots (probably a too generous hit rate) giving him a real DPS of 4.

LRM boat does almost twice the damage of the PPC and AC users!

Now, both pilots are attacking a moving target who is 800m from them. And they're both taking incoming fire from ACs.

Pilot A can still shoot while being buffeted. He still lands half his LRMs on target, giving him a real DPS of 7.
Pilot B's hit rate falls to 50%, due to buffeting. And his PPCs only do half damage at 800m. His real DPS is now only 1.25!

LRM boat is doing more than 5 times the damage of the PPC user!

Now, both pilots keep firing.

Pilot A is doing 3.78 heat per second.
Pilot B is doing 5 heat per second... even though he is chain firing to try to limit ghost heat.

Pilot B has to stop firing his PPCs sooner, as he hits the heat threshold sooner. Pilot A keeps firing for longer.

So, despite the LRM boat having a higher DPS to start with, it's now even higher, because it can keeping firing after the PPC user is forced to stop!


I think this illustrates why DPS should be a relevant consideration in the whole ''are LRMs balanced or not'' discussion.

How'd Pilot C do? I was really rooting for him, but he never got into the fight and was accused of AFK.

[Green Mamba]

Joseph Mallan, on 20 March 2014 - 09:56 AM, said:

Just remember Buddy

Not all White Knights are made the same!

Truly a shame that a image of goodness and strength has become an insult!

Joe, It interferes with the game the rest of us (95% or so) wanted and were Promised. White Knighter's are basically Obstructionists in Keeping PGI on the Path to having a proper game for us to play for years to come.

[Appogee]

FupDup, on 20 March 2014 - 10:00 AM, said:

He also ignored weapon tonnage.

Hang on.

I've been arguing all along that LRMs are fine, it's the boating of them that's the problem.

So when you now say I "ignored weapon tonnage" and "a more balanced loadout will be better'' .. then you are actually agreeing with what I have been saying all along!

(insert drum flourish and round of applause here please)

Technoviking, on 20 March 2014 - 10:06 AM, said:

How'd Pilot C do? I was really rooting for him, but he never got into the fight and was accused of AFK.

PIlot C had a pair of AC40s. I got bored doing the maths halfway through adding him, so he never made it to the field of battle. But he would still have been outpointed by the LRM boat by a long way, because his effective range was limited, and he hit his heat threshold sooner.

Edited by Appogee, 20 March 2014 - 10:15 AM.

[FupDup]

Appogee, on 20 March 2014 - 10:10 AM, said:

Hang on.

I've been arguing all along that LRMs are fine, it's the boating of them that's the problem.

So when you say I ignored weapon tonnage and state that a more balanced loadout will be better'' .. then you are actually agreeing with what I have been saying all along!

Hmm, I only read that previous quoted post of yours. I didn't see the part about boating being the specific issue. I'm too lazy to page through the whole thread.