38 replies to this topic

[D A T A]

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

[JohnnyWayne]

I havn't played yet, but randomness and aimbot mechanics like Missiles are not good. Obviously the "wanna test naow" - guys that claimed it was temporary were wrong. It looks like its here to stay until PGI does something.

[D A T A]

personally, i will play the tournment with a spider 5d, 1ppc 2 mdlas, 1 adv zoom 1 improved air strike, 1 improved arty strike..........those lame rules and lame lrms allow us only to do that

[KharnZor]

IL MECHWARRIOR, on 21 March 2014 - 01:32 AM, said:

personally, i will play the tournment with a spider 5d, 1ppc 2 mdlas, 1 adv zoom 1 improved air strike, 1 improved arty strike..........those lame rules and lame lrms allow us only to do that

Only if you're bad.

[Jakob Knight]

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

This is an old and untrue argument used by people who have no concept of what 'skills' are involved here, thinking all weapons should revolve around the same skills (i.e. the game should be all one kind of fight). Using LRMs well -does- require skill, as using direct-fire weapons well requires skill, just different skills. Let us compare them....

LRMs: To use effectively, the pilot must be aware of terrain both in front of him/her (aiming the launchers so the missiles don't travel into terrain...there is no way to control their flightpath once fired, and a person may fire LRMs at an angle that seems good only to have the missiles track into terrain on their own because the unique angle at that moment was bad) and the target, must be able to achieve a lock-on with targeting systems, must hold that lock from the moment of firing to the moment of impact, must ensure the target does not close within 180 meters, must make sure the target is not beyond 1000 meters (only weapon in the game besides SRMs with hard range limits), and must take into account that enemy countermeasures such as ECM and AMS will degrade and/or prevent the use of this weapon system.

Ineffective use: The firing unit will likely do -no- damage at all, or will cause only minor damage due to loss of missiles and/or loss of lock.

Direct Fire Weapons: To use effectively, the firing unit has to put the crosshairs in the center of the screen onto the target and pull the trigger, taking into account target movement for round travel time (if any). This can be mitigated by simply getting right up onto the target where a miss is nearly impossible and clicking on the firing button until either ammo is exhausted or the firing unit shuts down. Terrain is 'if you can see it, you can hit it'. Targeting of vulnerable locations is possible, increasing the effectiveness of these weapons by causing more damage than simple armor damage. Targets get no chance to evade, and the firing unit does not have to consider countermeasures of the target (there are none). Range is usually very forgiving, allowing the weapon to be used at long or point-blank range without issue.

Ineffective use: The firing unit will likely still cause significant damage to the target as even a pilot that isn't trying can score a lucky hit or be so close that missing is impossible, doing the full damage of the weapon to -someplace- on the target. However, the damage will not likely be as quick to take out the target, requiring more shots to do the same effect as skilled use would. Damage may be reduced due to firing the weapon beyond its maximum range, but the weapon can still be used to cause some damage.

So, using LRMs -does- require skills. Different skills, and the effect of lacking those skills is harsher than with other weapons. The LRM user has to think more strategically than the tactical-minded direct-fire combatant, and has to accept different limitations. To say using LRMs is in some way not requiring skill when all other weapons provide greater benefit and are easier to use when skill is lacking is contradictory.

In short, if you say LRMs don't require as much skill to use as direct-fire weapons, you simply don't understand them.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 21 March 2014 - 02:18 AM.

[Kilo 40]

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 using them and let us know how effective you are.

[Mardek]

what kind of game u play? Thee is lrm boat eveywhere and most map dosnt have enough cover and ams its still not adequate... what skill? in this game most map are so tiny that ur fat ass stalker take 2 steps and its in optimal range to "rain it down". Yet ppc are too hot gauss got nerfed ac20 shells reduced to a snail speed and srm sucks atm wtf people open your eyes. Peace.

Edited by Mardek, 21 March 2014 - 02:42 AM.

[meteorol]

Jakob Knight, on 21 March 2014 - 02:11 AM, said:

snip

Man, i'm certainly not saying lrms require no skill to use, but you are really oversimplifying the use of direct fire weapons while overemphasizing the complexity of using lrms for the sake of your argument.

I mean, especially this part:

Jakob Knight, on 21 March 2014 - 02:11 AM, said:

This can be mitigated by simply getting right up onto the target where a miss is nearly impossible and clicking on the firing button until either ammo is exhausted or the firing unit shuts down.

If this would be so "simple" we would see brawling mechs all over the place.
Makes me wonder why the forum is full of "brawling is dead" threads for about a year.

[Jakob Knight]

meteorol, on 21 March 2014 - 02:34 AM, said:

Man, i'm certainly not saying lrms require no skill to use, but you are really oversimplifying the use of direct fire weapons while overemphasizing the complexity of using lrms for the sake of your argument.

I mean, especially this part:


If this would be so "simple" we would see brawling mechs all over the place.
Makes me wonder why the forum is full of "brawling is dead" threads for about a year.

The reason they said 'brawling is dead' is not because LRMs dominated (indeed, they were nearly extinct), but because Sniping (direct fire again) was so effective. This because direct-fire mechs built for Sniping could both Snipe -and- Brawl due to the lack of the minimum range LRMs have to deal with. All that was meant was that brawler-specialized mechs were not being taken due to Sniper mechs being able to do it all.

And, no. I am not over-simplifying or under-simplifying. If you want final, hard, concrete evidence of this, simply watch a new player using LRMs and one using an ERLaser. The player with the LRMs will generally do -no damage- because they lack the skill to use the weapon (I've seen tons of players fire missiles then immediately switch to another target thinking the missiles will continue to hit, or fire them too close in), whereas the Laser player will generally score medium to full damage because they only have to point-and-shoot. That says just about all that needs to be said about this subject.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 21 March 2014 - 02:54 AM.

[meteorol]

Jakob Knight, on 21 March 2014 - 02:53 AM, said:

The reason they said 'brawling is dead' is not because LRMs dominated (indeed, they were nearly extinct), but because Sniping (direct fire again) was so effective. This because direct-fire mechs built for Sniping could both Snipe -and- Brawl due to the lack of the minimum range LRMs have to deal with. All that was meant was that brawler-specialized mechs were not being taken due to Sniper mechs being able to do it all.

And, no. I am not over-simplifying or under-simplifying. If you want final, hard, concrete evidence of this, simply watch a new player using LRMs and one using an ERLaser. The player with the LRMs will generally do -no damage- because they lack the skill to use the weapon (I've seen tons of players fire missiles then immediately switch to another target thinking the missiles will continue to hit, or fire them tou o close in), whereas the Laser player will generally score medium to full damage because they only have to point-and-shoot. That says just about all that needs to be said about this subject.

Yes, are oversimplifying stuff and you didn't understand what i was trying to say.
But based on your incredibly biased description of using direct fire weapons, (Try hitting a light or even fast medium mech with an AC20 by "just putting the crosshair at the center of the screen on your target" and "mitigating the target movement and travel speed by "simply" moving right up onto the target", good luck with that), i don't think it's worth having a discussion here.

You are comparing lasers, which are the easiest weapon for a new guy to get high damage numbers (not worthwhile damage, but atleast a bigger number at the end of the match) because they are the only weapons without travel time with LRMs, while completly ignoring direct damage weapons with slow bullet travel like the AC20.

Jakob Knight, on 21 March 2014 - 02:53 AM, said:

The player with the LRMs will generally do -no damage- because they lack the skill to use the weapon (I've seen tons of players fire missiles then immediately switch to another target thinking the missiles will continue to hit, or fire them too close in),

They don't lack the "skill" to use the weapon, they lack general and basic knowledge on how the weapon works. Switching to another target is no matter of skill, it's simply a problem of the freaking game not telling new players they have to stay on the target. Same goes for minimum range.
How many new players shoot PPCs at 20m if they are not lucky to get the "min range tooltip" when loading the map? Like 3/4 of them. You are mixing up "skill" with "basic knowledge of game mechanics"

Jakob Knight, on 21 March 2014 - 02:11 AM, said:

Ineffective use: The firing unit will likely do -no- damage at all, or will cause only minor damage due to loss of missiles and/or loss of lock.

Ineffective use: The firing unit will likely still cause significant damage to the target as even a pilot that isn't trying can score a lucky hit or be so close that missing is impossible, doing the full damage of the weapon to -someplace- on the target.

You are just ruling out pilots that ARE trying to score a hit and still miss. Guess what, those are out there aswell. Infact i see them every day.
Using a Ac, or a PPC ineffectively does not only lead to ineffective damage, it leads to no damage at all, because guys miss their target aswell.

Again, i am not saying using lrms takes no skill, but you are giving a highly biased comparison of both weapon types, highlighting the problems a lrm user has to deal with, while completely sweeping difficulties of using direct fire weapons (especially slow flying like the AC20) under the table.
I'm using both lrms and direct fire weapons, and claiming that using direct fire weapons efficiently takes nothing but pointing your crosshair at the center of the screen on your target and "simply" rush the enemy if you are unable to hit him from distance is just as ridiculous as claiming lrms would take zero skill to use.

May this be my last post in this thread. Hopefully it will be full of unbiased posts from now on.

Edited by meteorol, 21 March 2014 - 04:52 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

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.

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

[El Bandito]

meteorol, on 21 March 2014 - 04:50 AM, said:

Yes, are oversimplifying stuff and you didn't understand what i was trying to say. But based on your incredibly biased description of using direct fire weapons, (Try hitting a light or even fast medium mech with an AC20 by "just putting the crosshair at the center of the screen on your target" and "mitigating the target movement and travel speed by "simply" moving right up onto the target", good luck with that), i don't think it's worth having a discussion here.

This guy thinks hitting a light with AC20 is hard?

Lemme laugh out loud. I had better luck killing lights with AC20 than LRMs. Just gotta know how to lead, and the Light is dead or missing a limb. Not rocket science. In fact I can nail lights with AC20 easily with my 250ms ping.

Edited by El Bandito, 21 March 2014 - 04:58 AM.

[CygnusX7]

Buff SRM's.

[LoneMaverick]

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

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

FTFY

[Mechteric]

Mechwarrior 3 probably had the worst LRMs of them all. Mechwarrior 4 a close second.

Mechwarrior Living Legends probably was the best LRMs to date of all Mechwarrior games, and the MWO ones are fairly similar now. The main difference though is that where MWLL had pretty long lockon times (and Passive Radar!), you didn't have to maintain your lock the entire flight. Of course with the now faster LRMs its less of a big deal, but its still important.

Also I think what will help us out a lot is when Laser AMS is introduced so you don't have to worry about the ammo.

[El Bandito]

The tournament will sort out which build is OP, which is not. I suspect the snipe meta will still rule.

Edited by El Bandito, 21 March 2014 - 05:03 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

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

Ballistics & Energy= 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.

El Bandito, on 21 March 2014 - 04:57 AM, said:

This guy thinks hitting a light with AC20 is hard?

Lemme laugh out loud. I had better luck killing lights with AC20 than LRMs. Just gotta know how to lead, and the Light is dead or missing a limb. Not rocket science. In fact I can nail lights with AC20 easily with my 250ms ping.

But you want LRMs nerfed why Again???

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 21 March 2014 - 05:05 AM.

[StalaggtIKE]

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.

Last I checked AMS and ECM are pretty skilless as well.

Edited by StalaggtIKE, 21 March 2014 - 05:06 AM.

[B0oN]

I´ll give you anti-LRM´ers the ultimate skill-test ...

Indirect firing wihout any lock, how about that, gentlemen ?

^^

[Dracol]

Rad Hanzo, on 21 March 2014 - 05:06 AM, said:

I´ll give you anti-LRM´ers the ultimate skill-test ...

Indirect firing wihout any lock, how about that, gentlemen ?

^^

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

Speaking of which, how many modes does Direct fire Weapons have? Thats right, just one.