299 replies to this topic

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Wolfways, on 07 June 2014 - 01:30 PM, said:

What?
If i fire an LRM20 i expect to see 20 missiles launch. Just slow the RoF, decrease the impulse, and increase the damage and speed enough to make them worth using in direct-fire.

The idea is to reduce continuous spam from mismatching Launchers to available tubes, strengthen LRMs, and hopefully also rollback geometry changes on certain mechs like the Catapults (such as the extra bits added to them with multiple launchers installed).

Also in TT, missiles were in groups of 5 when they hit a section, which is one reason I suggest that alternative.

The other is to reduce the calculations that the server and clients have to do in regards to missiles.

Here are two pages that show how the grouping was done with missiles:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Edited by Praetor Knight, 07 June 2014 - 01:51 PM.

[Prezimonto]

Wolfways, on 07 June 2014 - 05:26 AM, said:

I'd prefer:
-ECM does not stop locks, but does hide the targets info/paperdoll/damage.
-LRM cooldown is increased by 30%, and LRM damage is increased by at least 30%...probably more like 50%.

Yeah, I'd prefer a version where you can go to "active scanning" which reveals yourself on the map (but not for locks) and cuts through ECM to acquire a lock after an extended wait period.

[Wolfways]

Praetor Knight, on 07 June 2014 - 01:48 PM, said:

The idea is to reduce continuous spam from mismatching Launchers to available tubes, strengthen LRMs, and hopefully also rollback geometry changes on certain mechs like the Catapults (such as the extra bits added to them with multiple launchers installed).

Also in TT, missiles were in groups of 5 when they hit a section, which is one reason I suggest that alternative.

The other is to reduce the calculations that the server and clients have to do in regards to missiles.

Here are two pages that show how the grouping was done with missiles:

Spoiler

Spoiler

Honestly i'm not bothered what happens server side. If PGI wanted to make LRM's fire in groups of fives that each hit a different section then fine, but at least have the graphics show the right number of missiles leaving the launchers even if the server considers each 5-group to be "1 missile".

[Lexx]

Domoneky, on 07 June 2014 - 12:10 AM, said:

[Nothing Whatsoever]

Wolfways, on 07 June 2014 - 02:09 PM, said:

Honestly i'm not bothered what happens server side. If PGI wanted to make LRM's fire in groups of fives that each hit a different section then fine, but at least have the graphics show the right number of missiles leaving the launchers even if the server considers each 5-group to be "1 missile".

That'll be fine with me.

[Tom Sawyer]

I dusted off my lam cat boat

Ripple firing a stream of 5s is fun and sometimes that is what this game needs

You can always spot a smart opposing team. They will use ECM and often send a fast light or medium up the sides to ambush the boats.

Conversely a good team will have a brawler stick by the boat to cover

[wanderer]

Koniving has suggested doubling the damage per missile- and the launcher cooldown.

I'd be just fine with that. Slower ROF with the same punch would mean needing to pack less ammo for the same results and less spam barrages on people too.

[Deathlike]

Azoic23, on 07 June 2014 - 01:38 PM, said:

What mech can't core out an assault in less than 30 seconds....

Spider-5V.

[Clint Steel]

Personally I wouldn't mind if LRM's disappeared from the battlefield all together. To me they give a lower skill way to interfere with good brawls. When there is a battle that doesn't have LRM boats, I tend to have more fun battles.

As far as "nerfing" them though, the main problem I have is their focus on my lights legs.

[Wolfways]

Clint Steel, on 07 June 2014 - 03:31 PM, said:

Personally I wouldn't mind if LRM's disappeared from the battlefield all together. To me they give a lower skill way to interfere with good brawls. When there is a battle that doesn't have LRM boats, I tend to have more fun battles.

As far as "nerfing" them though, the main problem I have is their focus on my lights legs.

Yeah, let's just remove terrain, buildings, etc and have flat maps to run about in the open...

If you want LRM's to stop focusing on your lights legs just stop running and they'll hit everywhere.

[Clint Steel]

Wolfways, on 07 June 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:

Yeah, let's just remove terrain, buildings, etc and have flat maps to run about in the open...

Play a game without LRMs, its fun. Snipers are still a threat, and you still say in cover, so not sure about your quip about flat maps. Anyway just my opinion.

Wolfways, on 07 June 2014 - 03:38 PM, said:

If you want LRM's to stop focusing on your lights legs just stop running and they'll hit everywhere.

I'm not sure holding still is the answer to that issue

[Derffe]

I'm not sure that LRMs are the real problem. I think part of the issue is one side being able to fire with impunity onto the other because of ECM coverage. I mostly drive light mechs and at this point I almost feel obligated to bring an ECM-capable mech or I feel like my team will just get rained on.

I dunno what the solution is; one solution is to make it so friendly ECM interferes with friendly guidance systems for missile-locks. Another solution, which I like, is to make it so ECM applies only for the mech that its on.

[Lightfoot]

Khobai, on 07 June 2014 - 09:30 AM, said:

..........On the whole I believe LRMs are poorly balanced. In some situations theyre too weak. In other situations theyre too strong. I think theres a lot of room for improvement there... ECM needs to be nerfed, LRMs need a slower rate of fire and higher damage per missile, and LRM impulse needs to be lowered to SRM level. Why does an LRM shake you three times more than an SRM when an SRM is a heavier warhead?

I can answer that. LRMs are firing 5-20 missiles per launcher and SRMs are firing 2-6. It could be tuned, but is realistic enough considering the number of missiles hitting.

I could stand for LRMs to be a bit weaker indirect and a bit stronger with LoS. Plus if you are running Artemis and TAG with your target TAG'd by you the buff should be higher since you are in LRM direct-fire mode.

[Mavairo]

If you're dying to LRMs you've made repeated serious tactical, strategic and logistical errors.
1: you waltzed out into the open or low cover. In which case you'd be focused down and reduced to slag in seconds flat from High ELO players in their coordinated opening salvo in the first place, LONG before the rain could even fall down upon you. This is a Tactical Error.

2: You failed miserably at locating the enemy spotters and removing them, and or allowed yourself to become Narced. Or you failed to look up and shoot the UAV down. This is a strategic Error.

3: You then failed to seek adequate cover after the first volleys began landing upon you. This is a Tactical Error.

4: You and your team took up a poor position against LRMs for one reason or another. This is a strategic error, and usually one that can directly correlate back to your lack of situational awareness, or the typical horrendous scouting from pugs.

5: You failed to take ECM. Logistic Error
6: You and your team failed to take AMS which stacks faster and harder than LRMS effectiveness does. Logistic Error.

Most every single player that gripes about LRMs does these six errors repeatedly. LRMs are so easy to counter that it's sad. If you're seeing alot of LRMs consistently enough for you to come onto the forums raging about them, your ELO is low. And it's low precisely because you make at least 2 of these errors repeatedly.

Above the Suck Tier, LRMs become one of the harder weapons in the game to utilize. It's even harder than effective brawling because it is fully dependent on your team being able to properly support you through several techniques beyond "hit them with tag and or narc!". Kiting being a classic example of herding the brawl into the open where the steel rain can fall upon your enemy. Knowing how and when to move in said brawl so that your friendly LRMs do not rain down on you as well as the enemy. Prioritizing threats in the middle of a furball, so your LRM boat can bring the rain in an efficient and effective manner. This can even mean hitting the R button, and at times shooting someone else entirely, while the rain falls on the other guy, putting complete faith in your LRM boat's fury to knock or disable a target while you finish someone else off, come back to said target, vape it and get it done.

Edited by Mavairo, 07 June 2014 - 05:45 PM.

[Deathlike]

Mavairo, on 07 June 2014 - 05:41 PM, said:

5: You failed to take ECM. Logistic Error

TBH, it's "kind of" a good thing that ECM isn't an MM factor. On the other hand, it literally makes fighting with LRMs feast or famine quite a bit (not always, but more often than not).

[Livewyr]

ECM is still an abomination in MWO... that's why they haven't touched it in over a year.

[Wolfways]

Clint Steel, on 07 June 2014 - 03:59 PM, said:

Play a game without LRMs, its fun. Snipers are still a threat, and you still say in cover, so not sure about your quip about flat maps. Anyway just my opinion.

I think matches with LRM's are fun (or would be if i considered them worth using), and if you still use cover then what difference does it make as you shouldn't get hit much by LRM''s anyway....unless you are not actually using cover.

[HBizzle]

I am just going to throw this out since multiple people are insulting my ability in the game: come at me.

You know my username in game. I am down for private 1 v 1.

**** it I am gonna add Zerberus and Kilo 40 and will record it.

Mavairo you want to go?

[HBizzle]

Apparently Zerberus is on my friends list actually. You guys don't even need to buy premium time, I will provide.

[n r g]

HBizzle, on 06 June 2014 - 11:42 PM, said:

Jesus Christ when are LRMS going to be nerfed? Can barely maneuver in pug matches without ECM right now. Feels like the game has been newbiefied for no talent ********* players.