775 replies to this topic

[Prezimonto]

VagGR, on 24 March 2014 - 11:31 AM, said:

yes because PPCs lock on track you and can be fired behind hills...

You can't fire behind hills without support with LRM's either. PPC's are fire and forget, so you can hill hump. When will people stop pretending that LRM's are amazing, and realize it's teamwork that clinches games. LRM's without other mechs to guard them, and deal damage, without spotters and harassers are just as worthless as they were 2 weeks ago. They're largely useful because less people are meta humping and actually working to provide targets and bringing enough LRM's to matches to make those helpers have a viable contribution to the team.

[Semper Fi]

What he said.
Metabuilders: Don't want to change my 52 - 75 alpha.
Don't want to speed my mech up, or add armor.
Don't want to change my HE by 1.2%
Don't want to adapt if I don't have too.

Those people.

Also most of the MWO vets know new things come out, everyone tries it, it dies down then things go back to normal. Meta builds.
Except in 6 days, a little less than implementation day, but still abundant. So change needed.

Two weeks is probably the better amount of time for evals, but like Snow said, appease the squeaky wheels helps.

Semper Fi

[Suicidal Baby]

General Taskeen, on 24 March 2014 - 09:28 AM, said:

Use your test server not the public servers so you can monitor/get feedback before pushing something to a game that is live...

That just is not possible when you factor in the number of builds and player dynamics involved. There needed to be a grace period for this level of alteration.

However, I do think that he should have gone with this level of speed increase in the first place as 45% has far too much of an impact on gameplay.

Edited by Suicidal Baby, 24 March 2014 - 11:53 AM.

[Barkem Squirrel]

Paul Inouye, on 24 March 2014 - 11:10 AM, said:

About the interesting find I was talking about:

• Lower Elo players adapted to the changes much faster than the higher Elo players.
  
• LRM use spiked hugely on the day of the change and has been dropping off slowly as time goes by.

About the reason why the slight nerf? Had nothing to do with the outcry... it was the monitoring of games and seeing the impact on the various types of gameplay that was observed.

I did not have time to play many matches right after the change, so most of my games last week were from the weekend.

I was expecting a 5 to 10% increase in damage, but it was more.

From running LRM boats most of the time I saw some old remedies come out.

• Runnings ECM mechs more. Some having 4 ECM mechs on a team.
  
• LRM boat hunters going after the boats.
  
• using terrain to block missiles that are targeted.
  
• limiting exposure to targeting by running behind the intervisibility line (IV line)
  
• More AMS

What I really did not expect.

• using NARC to draw fire while under a bridge or behind cover. (cover being buildings, terrain to protect you from fire.) I am guilty of this and I could not bring myself to shoot that raven, he was like our 13th mech. They wasted thousands of missiles on me for 3 minutes.
  
• Counter battery fire. I have always done this, but others were also doing the same. Kill the LRM boat by LRM boat, one by one with concentrated fire.
  
• The glorious spotters, TAG and NARC lights being used.

NARC's

God I love them, but having 6 or more mechs running around with them was funny. Then it was also confusing, since which ones were in cover and protected baiting me to fire.


Now about missiles hitting the center torso more.
I have been doing this for a while and with a 15 second exposure to engage a mech it is dead. Even an atlas. With TAG and Artemis coring a mech is easy, but you have to guide the missiles in. Great for when you are right behind the firing line, but the AC rounds can core you faster. The 175 gave us maybe 1 to 2 seconds less time to be exposed to AC fire, but Even the 160 speed will be good and still give LRM boats the time they need to guide missiles on target for coring. I do not think this needs to be changed since it was there for a long time. This also could be added up to the LRM 15's being fired out of 6 tube hard points. It fires in three vollies out of stalkers. so for all 60 missiles to be fired there are 10 period of missiles hitting a mech. Since these are smaller groups they focus more on the CT. I think it is a mechanic to look at. The jager A would chain fire 60 missiles, but only in 4 groups of 15, no so with the stalker, with 10, 5, 10, 5, 6, 6, 3, 6, 6, and 3.

I was thinking a nerf down to 160, but none for coring a mech, unless looking at changing missile hardpoints with limited tubes and allowing a larger launcher to fine at once out of them. I will do more damage out of a 6 tube launcher to the CT than I will with a 15 tube launcher firing an LRM 15.

Edited by Barkem Squirrel, 24 March 2014 - 11:52 AM.

[FerretGR]

Paul Inouye, on 24 March 2014 - 09:21 AM, said:

Next patch the speed will be reduced by 15m/s. I.e. net change will be from 120 to 160 (instead of 175). I'm also reducing the amount of screenshake caused by LRM explosions slightly. (0.35 instead of 0.4)

BOOOOOOOOOOO

They are fine. They're finally a real weapon.

[Evil Ed]

Consider adjust the target decay (module) according to the speed adjustments. I think the problem with the latest speed adjustment is that it is very difficult to break lock by using cover now.

[Dimitry Matveyev]

Don't nerf LRM's, please! At last it is something like a weapon system. At last I'm not laughing, when I see an "incoming missile" warning. I'm tired to see only "some AC's + a couple of lasers or PPC's" builds on the battlefield. At last I can see some artillery support on the battlefield. Nerf LRM's again and we will see this boring AC+lasers or PPCs fest again. I say - repair other weapon systems, like SRM's.

P.S. Don't judge the weapon system from boats perspective.
P.P.S. I'm not an LRM boat fan.

[awanaquillya]

LRMs are fine how they are now. The amount of LRM bots per match is the problem.

[Reno Blade]

As requested, here is the updated version:


Where the old LRM speed and AMS Range (120ms/s and 200m) downed about 5 LRMs, the new values do about 4
You can see the difference in the graph in the lower left if you look at AMS(200) and LRM(120) (first purple spot at 5.8) vs AMS(240) and LRM(175) (second teal spot at 4.8):

And you can also see the only difference for AMS 200 vs AMS 240 for the other launchers is one more missile shot down on Streaks (from 3.5 to 4.2) in the SSRM(200) column.

Added the old/new LRM speed (120m/s and 175m/s) to the graph of speeds to have a nice comparison.

[Appogee]

Reno Blade, on 24 March 2014 - 11:58 AM, said:

As requested, here is the updated version:

Nice analysis, thanks. (Interesting when you also consider the number by LRM boats per team, too!)

[Arcturious]

Maybe Paul you should also put some thought into why LRM's are the only weapon system that:

A ) Scales worse the larger the launcher

B ) Performs substantially better in chain fire than Alpha

With these two points it is clear that the system is broken. If all your testing is using chain fire, then your baseline for performance is drastically incorrect. It's obvious from a design perspective that increasing the speed of LRM's is only a buff due to chain fire usage. By tweaking this value, you are trying to increase damage on a system that has an incorrect baseline - speed is increased to make chain fire LRM's hit their target in time. Speed would not matter if the system was balanced off the initial volley.

Make tube counts matter in a material fashion. Design the system so the initial strike of all Launchers is the best performing option. Fix splash damage (which has been broken and removed from the game for over a year now). Fix clustering and initial pathing so that when firing more than one launcher, you don't nerf your damage due to the missile 'cloud' becoming larger and missing the target. In short, actually fix the system rather than tweak values in a broken system.

Chain fire should result in more misses as it gives the target time to get to cover, with the trickle of LRM's half hitting a wall or similar cover. Missiles should rely on the initial volley to do their damage, with any additional volley after that decreasing in effectiveness due to the target getting to cover (of course if the target doesn't move it will still continue to perform).

I shouldn't be penalised to take an LRM20. The system shouldn't work better the more LRM10's and 5's I can cram into a mech.

I should be able to take a single LRM10 or LRM15 and actually feel like that 7T of equipment is worth the investment. Currently, it is the only weapon system in game that has zero scalability. It's so broken it beggars belief on how it hasn't been fixed.

Take a step back from the stats and actually think about the system as a whole and how it currently operates in game, in relation to similar tonnage / damage systems. Look at the stats on their usage and actually realise what this means - ask why are people taking 4+ launchers of small tube count over a single LRM20. The system needs to be rebuilt from the ground up, as currently it has strayed very far from functional.

Edited by Arcturious, 24 March 2014 - 12:09 PM.

[627]

Anyone noticed that pauls posts get more and more greenish? first it was just the font color now the whole post... what is next green font on green background?

[Dirus Nigh]

Paul Inouye, on 24 March 2014 - 09:21 AM, said:

I'm also reducing the amount of screenshake caused by LRM explosions slightly. (0.35 instead of 0.4)

LRM based cockpit shake should be based on the number of missiles hitting the mech. An LRM 5 should not create the same amount of shake as an LRM 15.

[Shredhead]

Jonathan Paine, on 24 March 2014 - 10:41 AM, said:

Personally, I think the LRMs work well the way they are right now, good enough to give the pop-tarting meta a run for its money.

Sorry Mr Paine, but I have to disagree. LRMs as they are now severely punish and discourage mediums, heavies and especially brawlers of all weight classes. Snipers are pretty much still fine, while the LRM buff made the game only more stale. I had the most disgusting (sic!) assault match ever yesterday on River City. More about the why further below...

Quote

Consider this: Implement the speed nerf Paul suggested for the LOCKED ON LRMs, slight BUFF the speed of DUMB FIRED LRMs. Slightly nerf the duration of target decay. Projected effect: encourage people to skill shoot LRMs without a lock. P.S. I am also a fan of using a similar system as streaks to allocate damage from locked on lrms.

Here I can agree more. A better distinction between indirect, no-LoS shots, LoS shots and dumb fire is needed. Dumbfire can have 175 m/s all day long in my book, even an increase would be possible. Lock on shots with direct line of sight should get the lock on times they have now at maybe 150 m/s, while indirect lock on fire without LoS should have way more lock on time and advanced target decay should not work on target without LoS.
The biggest problem with LRMs always was that more than 75% of the damage goes directly to the center torso, even more with TAG, NARC and/or Artemis. At 125 m/s that wasn't as big a problem, because you could shake the lock in time to avoid the barrage. Now that is impossible.
Next problem is the flight path, which renders most "cover" useless, even if it's 5 meters higher than the mech you're in. The LRM swarm is terrain tracking, that is observable and no doubt about it.
Ergo, lower the speed again to sane amounts, make it need more skill and punish "lock leeching" and spread the damage, then we're talking viable LRMs.

[Kjudoon]

BLOOD WOLF, on 24 March 2014 - 11:14 AM, said:

Just curious, how many matches did you see the whole team bring AMS and at least 2 tons? i would also ask is why cant players spare 3.5 tons for AMS. There were some matches i played were only half the team brought AMS and sometimes less than that. With speed reduced i sure hope people don't think they can start to leave behind a handy AMS. Even with 1 ton its still something

I see on average 4-8 AMS on teams, the same that I did before, probably for the same reasons. Even the pre-patch trial stalkers that spawned a huge uptick in LRMs didn't affect that too much.

Good players in faster mechs with map awareness don't seem to bring AMS because they know how to not get shot easily or take better/fewer risks. I know I don't pack it on because I often have better ways to spend that 3.5 tons. Even at the 175m/s Was was able to dodge many a salvo in a 77kph Orion missile boat with spotters working me over. Before I was forced out of cover by the ROFLstomp happening on one memorable match, I probably got the enemy to waste 500 or so missiles into a building because I kept taunting the fire. The missiles were irritating to me when drawn out to defend against spotting cicadas and spiders, but it was direct fire ACs that got me as I went from cover to cover fighting.

Essentially, if your mech goes about 80ish, you can usually do this kind of play with relative safety if you know your maps and understand the dangers of sight lines and indirect fire. I maintain that it's still possible at 200m/s and that would be the highest I'd ever want the LRM speed to go.

Edited by Kjudoon, 24 March 2014 - 12:25 PM.

[Reno Blade]

Ah, sorry, need to include the new speed of 160 (only got 120 and 175m/s) to the chart. will update shortly

EDIT:
Now the correct ones.
You can see the new speed of 160m/s, the AMS can shot down 5.25 missiles at 240m.


The new speed here in orange shows the max of 6.25 seconds to reach 1000m.

Edited by Reno Blade, 24 March 2014 - 12:46 PM.

[stjobe]

Here's the problem though:

The missile code is broken. It's likely broken so badly it's beyond repair.

All those nice ideas (5+5+5+5 missiles from a LRM-20, different trajectories for direct and indirect fire, different lock-on times for direct and indirect fire, and so on) can't be done with the current missile code.

The CT-centeredness (yes, that's totally a word) of LRMs became apparent during the last (the REAL) LRMpocalypse last May, when they tried to remove splash damage - and couldn't, because then most missiles would just home in on the CT. So they left a 0.1m splash radius in to alleviate that problem, reduced missile damage, and called it a day.

To the best of my knowledge, the missile code we're using today is the same exact code as that one; at least I haven't heard of any changes to it, and we all know what a state LRMs have been in for the last year (and the less we talk about the state of SRMs, the better - it's shameful how long they've been neglected).

Oh, and one final thing: There's just one lock-on system in the missile code, so forget any ideas you might have of SSRMs and LRMs behaving differently in regards to lock-on.

The one thing we can hope for with LRMs is that they put the SSRM bone-targeting on LRMs as well, but apart from that I wouldn't get my hopes up for any missile changes until they actually sit down and fix the broken missile code.

Edited by stjobe, 24 March 2014 - 12:30 PM.

[Volkodav]

Remove free C3 on all mechs. Lock on the target for LRMs mechs - only visual detection and Narc \ TAG \ UAV or C3 equipped mechs.

Give active\passive radar. In passive radar - longer lock time.

[Dracol]

mau5trap, on 24 March 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

For those who wish not to view the video.. yes the spider dies in 17 seconds, but it took the beating because it ran out into the open in front of 2 lances.

One thing this patch did was bring out spotters again. The team able to ID enemy locations better usually won in the games I dropped in. YMMV

[Rebas Kradd]

Shredhead, on 24 March 2014 - 12:17 PM, said:

LRMs as they are now severely punish and discourage mediums...

LRMs promote mediums. Their speed is a direct answer to the LRM rain and gives teams a surgical strike option against LRM boats. My Centurion doesn't even need AMS.