38 replies to this topic

[wanderer]

Quote

A great tactic to use against a stationary or slow moving DDC... or ridge humpers just about to pop up again.

Actually, it's impossible to fire indirectly without a lock. You can dumb-fire, but it's only going to go to whatever solid object you have the crosshairs on. That is, you have to fire them with LOS- direct fire.

[Dracol]

wanderer, on 21 March 2014 - 06:53 AM, said:

Actually, it's impossible to fire indirectly without a lock. You can dumb-fire, but it's only going to go to whatever solid object you have the crosshairs on. That is, you have to fire them with LOS- direct fire.

So, how would the mechanic work to fire on a spot with LRMs that one does not have a LOS to nor a locked target?

Could do the noob tube (grenade launcher) dealio found in FPS games like Battlefield. A little arc indicator...

But then new players wouldn't learn how to work with a team was well. It would also lesson the role of the spotter. So, my vote would be no to an indirect fire solution.

[Trauglodyte]

IL MECHWARRIOR, on 21 March 2014 - 01:22 AM, said:

LRMs are not balanced because they are too effective comparing to the skill you need to use them......... low skill required should mean low effectivness.

try to make lrms similar to mw3 in the trajectory and lock system behaviour, they would require some skill in that way

Yet another bad post by a bad player that complains endlessly about EVERYTHING. Do us the favor and uninstall if things are so bad. Or, better yet, learn how to pilot appropriately and take counters. Cause, the rest of us are doing just fine.

[Almond Brown]

How about them Achievements eh?

P.S. Did they ninja in an increase of LRM damage or something?

[AlmightyAeng]

Joseph Mallan, on 21 March 2014 - 05:03 AM, said:

Ballistics & Energy= Drag, Point and click
LRMs=Point, Click and drag...
Sorry IL But LRMs require one more step to be functional than our Fire and forget weapons.

But you want LRMs nerfed why Again???

Fixed that for you. It's all about the order.

Edited by Ghost Badger, 21 March 2014 - 07:57 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ghost Badger, on 21 March 2014 - 07:57 AM, said:

Fixed that for you. It's all about the order.

Yes. Yes you did. Thank you!

[Screech]

To make them harder to use, watch some TV while playing. I personally am not that good at LRMs but the one boat I did run during the PPC meta scored me a 3.0 KDR while pugging. They were fine before just boring. Buff is fine but I really wish they would fix SRM instead of playing around with low effort weapons.

[Fire Mage]

IL MECHWARRIOR, on 21 March 2014 - 01:22 AM, said:

LRMs are not balanced because they are too effective comparing to the skill you need to use them......... low skill required should mean low effectivness.

try to make lrms similar to mw3 in the trajectory and lock system behaviour, they would require some skill in that way

I agree and quite surprised at the number of people that disagree.

Some quote accuracy but LRMs require little accuracy. You just need to hover the recticle in the target's general direction plus while behind cover, you don't have to worry about getting shot at.

Some quote poor skill in avoiding the missiles but there are many maps which lack adequate cover especially with the current trajectory of the missiles allowing them to hit targets behind most cover.

Some say they do require skill, well I never used to use LRMs but since it became meta, I was forced to use it with some mechs to be competitive. I was blown away by how easy it was compared with all other weapons. There is absolutely no skill involved and I was obliterating the enemy without even trying - I actually felt bad about it.

This has changed the game completely and it's angering and alienating a large number of people.

P.S. I don't post much (just a long-time reader) but this issue can't be ignored.

Edited by Fire Mage, 22 March 2014 - 10:37 PM.

[Rex Budman]

Khobai, on 21 March 2014 - 04:52 AM, said:

The same could be said for PPCs. Especially since they have higher accuracy than LRMs.

And yet hit like you are shooting a bottle rocket at a panzer? 10dmg Direct with a cooldown and heat that is the current PPC is a joke of a weapon.

[Green Mamba]

Buff to LRMS Promote MASS Cowardness in the Game

[Abivard]

If you can only succeed in ONE TYPE of weapon build, then you should not even post about how the other weapons are balanced.

I always hear about how so and so can't stand so and so weapon that they never use or are unable to use being OP.

How their narrow and confined play style is the only acceptable way to play and anything that counters it or is "Different" is OP.

I use all weapons, all types of mechs and many styles of Play. I do well with most of them, do you? If you did not answer yes, then you are in no position to judge between them.

When 5 or 6 or 7 mechs are focusing on you, you die fast. it is far more noticeable if LRM's are used then other weapons as they are very more visible and longer lasting special effects, ie, the missiles arc'n up and down, often splattering the area for awhile after the mech is dead. Along with that nifty warning that flashes "WARNING, INCOMING MISSILES"

If you are getting killed by LRM's, it is an ego bruiser, we all know you made a big BOO BOO to have gotten killed by LRM's, but so many players are too arrogant to admit they made a mistake so they must blame someone or something else for their failings.

All you players who think LRM's require no skill, take that Trial stalker and show us how you do better than in your own personal Meta-mech. If you reply that the trial mech isn't good enough you may as well just end your witch hunt now.

Most posters can not even agree on what Skill means let alone compare relative weapons skill sets.

[Abivard]

Fire Mage, on 22 March 2014 - 10:36 PM, said:

I agree and quite surprised at the number of people that disagree.

Some quote accuracy but LRMs require little accuracy. You just need to hover the recticle in the target's general direction plus while behind cover, you don't have to worry about getting shot at.

Some quote poor skill in avoiding the missiles but there are many maps which lack adequate cover especially with the current trajectory of the missiles allowing them to hit targets behind most cover.

Some say they do require skill, well I never used to use LRMs but since it became meta, I was forced to use it with some mechs to be competitive. I was blown away by how easy it was compared with all other weapons. There is absolutely no skill involved and I was obliterating the enemy without even trying - I actually felt bad about it.

This has changed the game completely and it's angering and alienating a large number of people.

P.S. I don't post much (just a long-time reader) but this issue can't be ignored.

Let us see the screenshots of you doing so well with LRM's?

I have some good SS's of me using LRM's... and same with all other mech/weapon types...I get most of my easy LRM kills off of stupid players who did stupid things, in fact that is about the only kind of kills you get with LRM's, that or because they were already so torn up a SRM2 would take them out, yes I said SRM2 ;p

[dario03]

Heres a video that has been posted on here a bunch of times before. I think PGI is trying to go with this approach with LRMs though I think they went a little far.
(1:40 mark being the main thing)


I'm usually against comparisons to COD but honestly LRMs are like the noobtube of mwo. Sure higher skilled players can use them better but it won't take a lot of skill to be effective with them.

[theta123]

Seeing people whine about LRM's, are the same people who go for the most OP builds of them all. PPC/PPC/AC/AC or just boat the hell out of everything.

[Ultimax]

The issue with indirect fire is one of lower skill, risk and effort requirements proportional to the results, not that those players actually have 0 skill.


My issue is mostly with the risk requirement.

The risk requirement for using LRMs with at least a few teammates to support you is exceptionally low for the magnitude of results you can derive.

This is in comparison to other methods of damage delivery that subsequently incur higher and higher amounts of risk (IDF > Long Range > Medium Range > Short Range) for what might be slightly more and in some circumstances even slightly or significantly worse results.


Put this into the random PUG queue, where Damage & Kills = XP/CBills, combined with the need to mount a coordinated defense with random team comp and you have a recipe for the situation we have right now.


Playing as a coordinated unit always takes some measure of skill, but when the weapon/tactic requires a lower skill/risk investment while achieving similar results to riskier methods, this is when the balance of the situation becomes skewed.


Saying that a particular tactic doesn't require as much risk or skill (or effort, or whatever term we can agree upon) doesn't suddenly turn unskilled players into savants. Nor does it make skilled players into awful ones.

The more skilled you are the more you can leverage what you gain from the lower requirement/high output dynamic.

Edited by Ultimatum X, 23 March 2014 - 05:16 AM.

[Butane9000]

Here's how you make LRMs a skill and team based weapon.

1.) LRMs use the SSRM targeting mechanic to spread the damage away from the CT.

2.) You change TAG so that instead of making the missile clump more they focus on the area that is tagged.

[xCico]

Im whining because I cant drive my favorites mechs anymore, BJ-1, STALKER with lpl and mediums, DDC brawler, shd, im forced to use ppc/ac and guess which annoy LRM boats even more and make them use more lrms, last time I played BJ one punch from hgn with lurms critted most of my parts in no time, before I could escape with critted 1 part, its not even wonder that lrm force more meta and assualts on field, but TBH i stop caring anymore, because I see this kind of game might become normal gameplay, and some weapons will just die here...

[R Razor]

I'm actually pretty sure that the crowd that's defending this new LRM *********** is the same crowd that spent so much time defending their poptart meta mech garbage......they aren't capable of playing and winning in anything short of a min-max setup and will fight tooth and nail to make sure there is some form of that available to them so they can get those all important wins and stats built up.

[Jakob Knight]

R Razor, on 23 March 2014 - 05:42 AM, said:

I'm actually pretty sure that the crowd that's defending this new LRM *********** is the same crowd that spent so much time defending their poptart meta mech garbage......they aren't capable of playing and winning in anything short of a min-max setup and will fight tooth and nail to make sure there is some form of that available to them so they can get those all important wins and stats built up.

You'd be wrong. I never 'pop-tart' as I'm all too aware of the limitations and vunerability of this tactic. I'm about maneuver warfare, not sitting in one place waiting for an arty strike.

The ones most complaining about the changes to LRMs, on the other hand, are those who want either brawling, and can't think beyond charging at the enemy guns blazing, or, oddly enough, the pop-tart users who now have to contend with something else being effective.

To say that 'pop-tart' players would -advocate- the change in a weapon they would never use (the mechanics of the LRM are completely against use with this tactic) is fairly ridiculous on your part.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 23 March 2014 - 06:26 AM.