684 replies to this topic

[Mavairo]

Kjudoon, on 18 July 2014 - 09:45 PM, said:

With these same buffs, I would be satisfied too. They're still not consistant, no splash damage anymore (damage nerf) and the speed would screw up the long game with lost locks thanks to ECM and RaDerp Modules (even MORE critical now).

PGI, this would be a neat buff to try. Yes, it will eat newer players, but the higher level players would suddenly have a new weapon to play with. Guidance is more iffy, but LOS game is gonna be SWEEEEEET in return.

Well EVERYTHING eats newer players.
Like I said before, you don't see Blizzard nerfing the zergling because the zergling rush eats newbies alive because they can't or won't micro their workers to fight off the rush.

LRMs aren't viable above the mid point in the skill brackets, and the reason is because we keep nerfing them for "the newbies". There comes a point where you just have to tell people "look, you're going to get hurt, you're going to die if you play like a dumb ass".

I think the 1.25 dmg, 185 m/s flight speed would help things tremendously for LRMs when coupled with the Take and Hold objectives, implementations of Fortress Mode (where you're facing turrets that are armed with AC20s, 10s etc, and maybe some defensive walls... LRMs would be the IDEAL way to deal with them since they're indirect fire capable) where one team has to defend the base, and the other is laying siege to it. The defenders would be faced with having their defenses eroded and their mechs badly softened up, or having to go out engage, search and destroy the enemy.

Rewarding Objective wins in these two game modes, by giving another 20,000 Cbills for Winning By Objective would also provide Incentive to play by objectives.

[Aim64C]

Mavairo, on 19 July 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

I think the 1.25 dmg, 185 m/s flight speed would help things tremendously for LRMs when coupled with the Take and Hold objectives, implementations of Fortress Mode (where you're facing turrets that are armed with AC20s, 10s etc, and maybe some defensive walls... LRMs would be the IDEAL way to deal with them since they're indirect fire capable) where one team has to defend the base, and the other is laying siege to it. The defenders would be faced with having their defenses eroded and their mechs badly softened up, or having to go out engage, search and destroy the enemy.

LRMs should behave like real missiles.



You'll notice there's a point where the missile ceases accelerating - it has depleted its fuel and is now in purely ballistic flight, little more than a guided bomb moving very fast.

LRMs should behave this way - they should burn and accelerate toward their target as if it is accelerating at 32f/s^2 upward (compensation for gravity - or if we go with worlds with altered gravity - it would be included in the simulated missile inertial navigation systems). Their fuel should deplete, and the missile should 'fall' into its target.

FLINT actually uses different guidance principles for missiles like the Hellfire - which is more similar to what a mech's LRM battery would be like. They tend to burn in a predetermined ballistic arc before activating terminal guidance and adopting the "improved proportional navigation" guidance.

Of course, this would mean that LRMs could potentially have different ranges in areas with different atmospheres, gravities etc (this would actually make LRMs in space somewhat interesting as changes in direction require thrust be applied).

It would also mean that there would be no fixed maximum range (unless you just make them self-destruct at 1000 meters like no military would ever sensibly do), and elevation would play a large role in LRM effectiveness.

*shrug*

[SethAbercromby]

Aim64C, on 19 July 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:

Of course, this would mean that LRMs could potentially have different ranges in areas with different atmospheres, gravities etc (this would actually make LRMs in space somewhat interesting as changes in direction require thrust be applied).

It would also mean that there would be no fixed maximum range (unless you just make them self-destruct at 1000 meters like no military would ever sensibly do), and elevation would play a large role in LRM effectiveness.

*shrug*

I don't really see the reason everything has to be so hyper ralistic with some folks when it comes to certain things. Sure, doing a load of high level calculations will make missiles look realistic, but will throw a massive amout of calculation effort onto the server for each missile and salvo. Muliply that by multiple thousand and you're starting to get the idea what programming efficiently means for these types of games. Adding this kind of load for a system that most people don't even notice or honestly not really care about would be insane from just about any perspective. Real behavior wouldn't fix the current problem LRMs are facing in the least but hey, what shoud you care about? You don't have to implement it after all.

I agree with some of the other people that missiles should get a speed and possibly damage boost. people are also split on the missile warning system. How about we'd link it into the sensor area? Let's assume the sensor array has a built-in detecection range for missiles of 300m and needs the missiles inside its "visible area". If the missiles it detects are headed towards the 'Mech, you get a missile warning. We could also link AMS into the same system to eliminate the infamous AMS shooting missiles through ceilings scenario. I think most of the required systems for that are already in place. Thanks to 360° target retention and AMS, we can assume that the 'Mech systems are always aware of what's around them but choose to ignore it unless the server tells them to. Add a detection zone and a raycast check that confirms LoS every 0.5 seconds and link it into the AMS and missile warning control.

[ShinVector]

Mavairo, on 19 July 2014 - 07:55 AM, said:

I think the 1.25 dmg, 185 m/s flight speed would help things tremendously for LRMs when coupled with the Take and Hold objectives, implementations of Fortress Mode (where you're facing turrets that are armed with AC20s, 10s etc, and maybe some defensive walls... LRMs would be the IDEAL way to deal with them since they're indirect fire capable) where one team has to defend the base, and the other is laying siege to it. The defenders would be faced with having their defenses eroded and their mechs badly softened up, or having to go out engage, search and destroy the enemy.

You thought is my LRMs are so, weak... They should be buffed so, that are nearly impossible to avoid and cause tremendous damage on their OWN. While completely ignoring that indirect fire capability.

Remember how I keep telling you how LRMs requires a spotters to be used properly which you dismissed to 'non-Viable' ?

I mentioned to you I would take some videos on show it should be done.
Do these Stomps meaning anything to you ? Imagine how it would be with your 185m/s + 1.25 Damage LRMs suggestion.

*It should be up in an hour.







*Yeah kinda sad to see 6man and 8man groups get destroyed and QQ.

Edited by ShinVector, 20 July 2014 - 11:20 AM.

[Kjudoon]

I haven't seen the videos yet, but this position begs the question of "why aren't LRMs popular/practical in the Esport levels"?

Edited by Kjudoon, 20 July 2014 - 11:21 AM.

[ShinVector]

Kjudoon, on 20 July 2014 - 11:21 AM, said:

I haven't seen the videos yet, but this position begs the question of "why aren't LRMs popular/practical in the Esport levels"?

*Yeah.. Big videos takes a while for youtube to process.

My question to that question would how many of us play at that competitive level ? I know don't, probably 95% of the matches has nothing to with being competitive.

Probably another similar question would be.. How people actual use Private match mode ?

[Mavairo]

ShinVector, on 20 July 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

You thought is my LRMs are so, weak... They should be buffed so, that are nearly impossible to avoid and cause tremendous damage on their OWN. While completely ignoring that indirect fire capability.

Remember how I keep telling you how LRMs requires a spotters to be used properly which you dismissed to 'non-Viable' ?

I mentioned to you I would take some videos on show it should be done.
Do these Stomps meaning anything to you ? Imagine how it would be with your 185m/s + 1.25 Damage LRMs suggestion.

*It should be up in an hour.







*Yeah kinda sad to see 6man and 8man groups get destroyed and QQ.

Apparently you weren't here during beta, there was a phase where they were FAR stronger than my proposed buff and were still deemed inferior weapon.
You found a way to kill bads with LRMs.
Not impressed.
Call me when LRMs dominate PGI events, and third party tournaments.

I kill 10, 8, 6 mans when in a Fang armed with 2 LPL and an AC10. Doesn't mean the Fang is competitive.

Edited by Mavairo, 20 July 2014 - 11:38 AM.

[Kjudoon]

ShinVector, on 20 July 2014 - 11:35 AM, said:

*Yeah.. Big videos takes a while for youtube to process.

My question to that question would how many of us play at that competitive level ? I know don't, probably 95% of the matches has nothing to with being competitive.

Probably another similar question would be.. How people actual use Private match mode ?

Valid question indeed.

[ShinVector]

Mavairo, on 20 July 2014 - 11:36 AM, said:

Apparently you weren't here during beta, there was a phase where they were FAR stronger than my proposed buff and were still deemed inferior weapon.
You found a way to kill bads with LRMs.
Not impressed.
Call me when LRMs dominate PGI events, and third party tournaments.

I kill 10, 8, 6 mans when in a Fang armed with 2 LPL and an AC10. Doesn't mean the Fang is competitive.

1. Maybe my join date of Aug 2012 might mean something to you.
2. Sorry dude.. LRMs speed was never buff in CB. The reason it was less of an issue in CB was because many other weapons were just as OP back then... SRMS... STREAKS.. PPC/ERPPC post buff.
3-4. You made your judgement even without seeing the videos eh.. That's just how you argue.
5. LRMs nearly won out the first Faction Tourny... Many of Top 10 on various factions was super boating LRMs post 175m/s buff. I know because I was Liao #10 dealing with it in a light.

[Mavairo]

ShinVector, on 20 July 2014 - 11:48 AM, said:

1. Maybe my join date of Aug 2012 might mean something to you.
2. Sorry dude.. LRMs speed was never buff in CB. The reason it was less of an issue in CB was because many other weapons were just as OP back then... SRMS... STREAKS.. PPC/ERPPC post buff.
3-4. You made your judgement even without seeing the videos eh.. That's just how you argue.
5. LRMs nearly won out the first Faction Tourny... Many of Top 10 on various factions was super boating LRMs post 175m/s buff. I know because I was Liao #10 dealing with it in a light.

1: then you need to refresh your memory. LRMs back then had Steeper (read higher) elevation angles that they could attack through. They also did More damage per missile, than 1.25. They could soar over MORE terrain than they can now, and weren't all that and a bag of chips, like you claim that they are NOW. Let's think about that, shall we?
2: Current PPCs are Better than CB LRMs were.
3: I don't need to, you admitted to them whining like ******* at the end of the match. Does anymore really need to be said?
5: First off you using yourself as an example with Liao? Bad form. Liao is the least popular faction in MWO and was one of the easiest to ladder farm with, same with Marik. "many"? Look at the top finishers mechs. DS, 3D, Shawk, HGNs. That's all that needs to be said. Especially since they went and won the Second Challenge too. RHOD? Dominated by AC and PPCs
Beer warrior? it was ALL ACs, SRMs and Lasers. RHOD current? So far once again LRMs fail to take the field and perform.
For a weapon that's supposedly OP, they sure seem to keep falling right back off the radar in tournament events don't they.

[Jimmy Page]

LRM's travel too fast.
LRM's fire rate is too high. (it needs to be half of what it is now)
LRM heat is too low. (Needs almost doubled)
NARC is WAY OP currently.

There is a problem when 75% of the mechs run LRM's. This truly is LRM warrior online. You cannot even run a light anymore because you get LRM'd to death. Hell i run dual AMS with 6 tons of ammo and it's out every game. Nothing can stop them. Just get a team of 10 LRM boats and run TAG and NARC and you win. This is as bad as the days of the broken SRM splat Cats or when all LRM's hit the head slot for insta kills.

[Kjudoon]

Jimmy Page, on 20 July 2014 - 12:56 PM, said:

LRM's travel too fast.
LRM's fire rate is too high. (it needs to be half of what it is now)
LRM heat is too low. (Needs almost doubled)
NARC is WAY OP currently.

There is a problem when 75% of the mechs run LRM's. This truly is LRM warrior online. You cannot even run a light anymore because you get LRM'd to death. Hell i run dual AMS with 6 tons of ammo and it's out every game. Nothing can stop them. Just get a team of 10 LRM boats and run TAG and NARC and you win. This is as bad as the days of the broken SRM splat Cats or when all LRM's hit the head slot for insta kills.

or does my sarcas-o-meter need recalibration?

[Yokaiko]

Aim64C, on 19 July 2014 - 08:34 AM, said:

LRMs should behave like real missiles.



You'll notice there's a point where the missile ceases accelerating - it has depleted its fuel and is now in purely ballistic flight, little more than a guided bomb moving very fast.

LRMs should behave this way - they should burn and accelerate toward their target as if it is accelerating at 32f/s^2 upward (compensation for gravity - or if we go with worlds with altered gravity - it would be included in the simulated missile inertial navigation systems). Their fuel should deplete, and the missile should 'fall' into its target.

FLINT actually uses different guidance principles for missiles like the Hellfire - which is more similar to what a mech's LRM battery would be like. They tend to burn in a predetermined ballistic arc before activating terminal guidance and adopting the "improved proportional navigation" guidance.

Of course, this would mean that LRMs could potentially have different ranges in areas with different atmospheres, gravities etc (this would actually make LRMs in space somewhat interesting as changes in direction require thrust be applied).

It would also mean that there would be no fixed maximum range (unless you just make them self-destruct at 1000 meters like no military would ever sensibly do), and elevation would play a large role in LRM effectiveness.

*shrug*

You may note there are plenty of semi-active/active missile systems that burn all the way to target as well.

[Khobai]

Again the only real problem with LRMs is their absurdly high impulse. It needs to be lowered significantly.

Their impulse is three times higher than an AC20. Its ridiculous.

And buffing LRMs in other ways would not be entirely out of the question if the impulse was significantly lowered.

[ShinVector]

Mavairo, on 20 July 2014 - 11:55 AM, said:

3: I don't need to, you admitted to them whining like ******* at the end of the match. Does anymore really need to be said?

Lol.. You are also whining like as if LRMs are weaker than Flamers. Trying to bring you back to reality with some videos as proof they can really good when used properly... Go ahead and deny reality...

I hope the Videos show other peeps how LRM 'should be' used. In fact I see a WHOLE lot more narc deployment nowadays which evidence in the videos.

1. NARC people.. Aim for big fat slow juice targets with the highest damage potential.
2. Even higher priority target. ECM mechs.
3. Let your buddies dump their LRMs on these guys ASAP before they can retaliate.

Get the numbers advantage early for the TEAM.. Usually it is a sure win with the enemy team traumatised by LRM RAIN.

*The dude misses the point that running in the the tourny allows you see what are the build people in the leader board brought into the tourny...... Nothing to do with the ranking itself.

Edited by ShinVector, 20 July 2014 - 01:58 PM.

[Yokaiko]

Kjudoon, on 20 July 2014 - 01:06 PM, said:

or does my sarcas-o-meter need recalibration?

Sounds like a few of the guys that spent all day yesterday NARCing and giggling.

Seriously, NARCs are SO MUCH FUN now, in solo games when you can count on half of your team having at least one LRM rack its like a "kick here" sign.

Even morso for getting the D-DC in the open.

[Wolfways]

ShinVector, on 20 July 2014 - 11:18 AM, said:

You thought is my LRMs are so, weak... They should be buffed so, that are nearly impossible to avoid and cause tremendous damage on their OWN. While completely ignoring that indirect fire capability.

Remember how I keep telling you how LRMs requires a spotters to be used properly which you dismissed to 'non-Viable' ?

I mentioned to you I would take some videos on show it should be done.
Do these Stomps meaning anything to you ? Imagine how it would be with your 185m/s + 1.25 Damage LRMs suggestion.

*It should be up in an hour.







*Yeah kinda sad to see 6man and 8man groups get destroyed and QQ.

Didn't watch the first two because everyone insists on posting vids of Alpine and Caustic to "prove" that LRM's are OP.
I did watch the 3rd though and yes it shows that teamwork is OP, especially against players who don't use cover. Tbh though your lance scores weren't exactly impressive. Only one Stalker had decent damage.

Also you keep saying it's "how LRM's should be used". Yes, it's how they should be used when fired indirect, but that doesn't change the fact that they are pathetic in direct-fire...or that people who know how to avoid LRM's just don't get hit. I think the only mech i saw in that vid that was using cover was you! although i obviously couldn't see what your team were doing most of the time. Most of the enemy team were wandering about in the open. Canyon Network is stupidly easy to avoid LRM's on...just like most maps. Caustic is the hardest though imo.

Yokaiko, on 20 July 2014 - 02:03 PM, said:

Sounds like a few of the guys that spent all day yesterday NARCing and giggling.

Seriously, NARCs are SO MUCH FUN now, in solo games when you can count on half of your team having at least one LRM rack its like a "kick here" sign.

Even morso for getting the D-DC in the open.

"in the open" = failed tactics

[Yokaiko]

Wolfways, on 20 July 2014 - 02:10 PM, said:

. Caustic is the hardest though imo.


"in the open" = failed tactics

You said it there.

Also, caustic has TONS of cover, but its around the edges and its rare that puglets use it.

[krash27]

Tw1stedMonkey, on 16 July 2014 - 08:33 PM, said:

You will never convince these colossally thick-headed people with any kind of logic. They have gone far past that point in their frenzied defense of their limited view on the issue. Apparently they want this game to be a constant cover hump in PUG games because it's difficult to rally a push or coordinate attacks when you are lucky to have 2 or 3 people that actually say something in a game. They also apparently want to encourage the death-ball strategy because leaving the safety of your team's ECM is a god awful tactical mistake for any and all reasons and only ECM lights should be allowed to do the function of a light well.
I'm done with this waste of time and effort trying to convince those that apparently know all and see all.

Translation = I want to mindlessly charge at the enemy without having to think what so ever.

I play my A1 a lot and it is far from OP friend.

[Kjudoon]

Well I watched the videos you put up Shin, and really, Mav's not wrong on most of his basic premise. I did notice you kill snaking a lot though. LOL. As a Remorae for the LRM sharks out there, you stand to lose a lot if they change it seems.... well for a while.

That said, these videos do show that narcing targets is a valid tactic for casual/low level games. We haven't seen any tournys lately, but that will change soon I suspect. The real proof that LRMs are underpowered will be once we start seeing teams using LRMs to win matches. Solo tournies, yes you can farm the damage. That's a known fact, so it's not really a good measure of them, but team tournys are.

What I'd love to see done sometime as an experriment is a 24 team LRM vs DF and see what results come about after the first tier starts out matching the teams off by weapon system so no matter what we'd have 12 matches of LRM vs DF, and then see who ends up superior in the end.

My money's still on DF when high levels of skill are involved.