0
Lrms Are Fine. Narc Needs Nerfed
Started by MischiefSC, Mar 23 2014 07:24 AM
48 replies to this topic
#41
Posted 23 March 2014 - 02:34 PM
I'd be good with ECM just blocking paperdoll details and any LRM buff - Artemis, NARC, even TAG.
#42
Posted 23 March 2014 - 04:53 PM
Krinkov, on 23 March 2014 - 01:46 PM, said:
It sounds like nobody realizes NARC isn't a homing beacon. If you NARC a target you still need to keep it in LOS for your team to be able to hit it. You can't just NARC and hide. If you are getting hit by LRMs while NARCed the light mech is still in LOS.
......................
#43
Posted 23 March 2014 - 05:06 PM
Prior to the patch in testing grounds the target would be lost if you lost line of sight with NARC on. If this has changed they should revert that part.
Edit: I just ran testing ground with NARC, you lose lock if you have NARCed a target but do not have LOS. Unless live and testing grounds differ on this, I was right, NARC requires LOS.
Edit: I just ran testing ground with NARC, you lose lock if you have NARCed a target but do not have LOS. Unless live and testing grounds differ on this, I was right, NARC requires LOS.
Edited by Krinkov, 23 March 2014 - 05:14 PM.
#44
Posted 23 March 2014 - 05:22 PM
Khobai, on 23 March 2014 - 12:50 PM, said:
I agree that NARC was overbuffed. NARC should not defeat ECM. That was a really stupid decision.
ECM is supposed to counter LRMs. But when ECM has so many counters that its no longer able to counter LRMs it defeats the purpose of ECM.
Which means ECM needs less counters.
ECM is supposed to counter LRMs. But when ECM has so many counters that its no longer able to counter LRMs it defeats the purpose of ECM.
Which means ECM needs less counters.
Wait... you think that ECM is too weak? ECM shouldn't do half of what it does. All of the counters to it (BAP/TAG/NARC) are the only way to vaguely balance it.
#45
Posted 23 March 2014 - 05:42 PM
Krinkov, on 23 March 2014 - 05:06 PM, said:
Prior to the patch in testing grounds the target would be lost if you lost line of sight with NARC on. If this has changed they should revert that part.
Edit: I just ran testing ground with NARC, you lose lock if you have NARCed a target but do not have LOS. Unless live and testing grounds differ on this, I was right, NARC requires LOS.
Edit: I just ran testing ground with NARC, you lose lock if you have NARCed a target but do not have LOS. Unless live and testing grounds differ on this, I was right, NARC requires LOS.
It is different on live servers, I've done both. Live servers keeps the lock when out of LoS.
#48
Posted 24 March 2014 - 09:03 AM
NARC got a significant buff when LRMs also received a buff, and I think people are conflating the two.
NARC is fine. That it defeats ECM says more about how awfully ECM has been implemented than the proper strength or balance of NARC.
People feeling the sting of LRMs and upset with NARC on top of it need to check and see if they have been neglecting the inclusion of AMS to their mechs and perhaps rethink that policy.
NARC is fine. That it defeats ECM says more about how awfully ECM has been implemented than the proper strength or balance of NARC.
People feeling the sting of LRMs and upset with NARC on top of it need to check and see if they have been neglecting the inclusion of AMS to their mechs and perhaps rethink that policy.
#49
Posted 24 March 2014 - 09:05 AM
I'm all for NARC beating ECM. I'm just saying that due to the layout of certain maps it needs to fall off after you start getting hit. 3 seconds or so. Otherwise it becomes a death sentence on those maps in that circumstance.
Both LRMs and NARC need a bit of a tweak. Not much, just a bit. LRMs a tad slower. Maybe 160 or so. NARC needs a small adjustment back in that regard but conversely to be only 1.5 tons and 1 crit slot with 10 shots/ton.
Both LRMs and NARC need a bit of a tweak. Not much, just a bit. LRMs a tad slower. Maybe 160 or so. NARC needs a small adjustment back in that regard but conversely to be only 1.5 tons and 1 crit slot with 10 shots/ton.
23 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 23 guests, 0 anonymous users