Aresye, on 16 July 2014 - 07:17 PM, said:
Not entirely, because ever since the radar deprivation module came out, I've had zero issues with LRMs. If I end up caught in the open, it's my own fault. If I don't stay with the ECM mech, it's my own fault. If I get narced or tagged, it's my own fault.
Getting hit by 60-80 LRMs while behind cover after firing a single shot around the corner, and some dude with advanced target decay got the red dorito for a split second for him and his buddies? That's a different story.
How exactly would it be considered that I'm playing the game wrong when I stick close to cover and don't venture out into the open? Am I be penalized by some magical ability for the missiles to still home on me without anybody or anything having LOS?
You aren't playing the game wrong when you die.
The fact of the matter is that the indirect and latent homing of missiles is somewhat necessary for the game to make any kind of progress at all. Without it, there would literally be zero reason to have any kind of missile support (there really isn't a reason, currently).
The alternative would be missiles that need to move - much - faster.
I've actually proposed overhauled missile mechanics several times - but it's pretty pointless since it gives Streak LRMs a purpose and would place more burden on acquiring the lock than on staring at the enemy while the missiles take the recycle time of a gauss rifle to reach their target (assuming I'm going for some range - which is why I usually reserve targets for 300-500 meters). It would also get rid of the idea that SRMs are rockets and differentiate between Streaks and standard SRM varieties properly.
It's really pretty simple. For LRMS, when the button is held, each tube begins to 'roll' with the percentage of 'lock' success of each roll determined by range, presence of TAG/NARC/BAP/ARTEMIS - perhaps environmental factors could be included in there as well. Some manner of indication is given to the pilot as to the status of overall tubes that are locked. When the button is released - all missiles fire. Those that are locked cruise in an arc to the target before terminal guidance kicks in like streaks and guides to hitboxes (again determined by other factors - an Artemis system illuminating the target during terminal guidance decreases the 'spread' as would a TAG or NARC system illuminating the target). Missiles that are not locked would cruise to the location where the target was when the missiles were fired.
Streak LRMs, therefor, would only fire locked missiles - be it 2/40 missiles or 40/40 missiles.
SRMs behave much the same way - except they are always attempting to lock onto a target once it enters within range - the percentage of locked tubes corresponding to the loudness of a 'growl' (think the way the sidewinder missile indicates the strength of an IR source it is locked onto). SRMs guide to the target like current streak SRMs do if they are locked - the others just whiz off (possibly in random directions). Streak SRMs, therefor, would only ever launch locked missiles.
What all of this means is that the longer you attempt to acquire a lock - the closer to 100% you get. Committing less time to a lock will statistically mean less efficiency. Streaks simply allow one to remain efficient with ammo even if the salvo is substandard.
I actually argue that missiles should behave according to ballistics. A missile should launch, accelerate, and attempt to guide to its target regardless of the range involved (you can try to fire at a mech 5 kilometers away, if you want) before dropping into the ground. There would be no automatic self-destruct after a certain length of time. Perhaps you could hit a target well outside of the effective range (particularly if you have the high ground) - perhaps you wouldn't. The same would go with SRMs - although they would have a finite range at which they begin attempting to lock (but a target fleeing out of range may not be completely safe from the missiles that were already locked).
Quote
What exactly constitutes the "open?" I'd always assume that the open meant the open areas of a map, but according to pro-LRM logic here: Any missiles fired at you = open. So half my torso barely peaks around the corner for a split second and 3 LRM boats fire at me. Is that me being in the open? Had I made some grievous tactical error by deciding to peek around the corner and look for where their team is?
A lot of the problem here is that the game is designed to be Team Solaris. You're boxed into a very small space with nowhere to go and nothing to do but shoot at other mechs.
A lot of the 'grand balance' of weapons is broken without more diverse and expansive battlefields. Light mechs lose their role as scouts and vehicle harassers (shouldn't they be able to go blow up the field artillery that has to be within 10 kilometers, or so, of where you are to provide support?).
Of course - if we start to entertain these notions, the idea of a "match" drops away and we must look at more persistent server environments (such as the "Marathon" matches that were held for C&C Renegade or the persistent sandbox servers of DayZ and other interesting survival games coming out).
And that is so far and away from the alpha we are playing right now that it's discussing a different game model, entirely.
Which is why MWO will never feel right. Battlemechs were not designed to simply shoot other mechs.
But, I suppose more to the point - if the game were constructed properly - "peek and shoot" would not be how one plays the game - it would be a tactic within the game. As of right now - it's really the only way to play the game. Which, you're never going to get away from the concept of cover and concealment - but there's a lot of focus on insta-damage, snap-shot reactions that leaves a somewhat hollow and frustrating 'dakka-dakka/pew-pew' experience.
Quote
I'm not against LRMs...at all. I just think the whole, "missile homing despite no LOS," bs was simply...bs, and the common phrase of, "Don't be in the open," came off as a little bit insulting whenever it was said. I mean, what "should" I have done? Not peeked around a corner? Sheesh. According to the LRM fans I should never, ever show myself to them. I should just hide behind a rock and never peek out for the entirety of a match.
Radar dep was a godsend to the game, because now I'm legitimately doing something stupid when I get hit by them, and it's less frustrating knowing that.
It also tells me that you either used NARC, a good spotter, or UAV to take me out, which actually makes your claims of, "LRMs require a lot of skill," actually have merit. For everybody who rages about how radar dep ruined the game for missiles, all that means is your entire success with missiles relied SOLELY on target decay to AVOID having to use teammates and/or other mechanics to hit mechs. Now that your precious (and BS) mechanic has been taken away, now you actually have to USE your team. Go figure.
To be fair - the existence of Artemis pretty much invalidates this principle.
While I do believe that team locks need to be put into some check (in my proposed system, it would decrease the per-roll lock success percentage - therefor increasing the half-life of the lock for the missile battery) - the idea that missiles are supposed to be some kind of team reliance weapon is just silly.
Why do I need to rely on someone else to be able to do damage to your mech?
Consider there is an AC40 jaeger on the other side of a building. You know it is there. Your team knows its there, and you also know that it would be stupid to accept the attrition of storming around the corner to kill it (and also enter into the fatal funnel of fire from a team that is likely reinforcing him).
For me to be effective with my missiles (let's say I know the missile fall angle will take it just over the top of the cover he's using) - I have to wait for someone with TAG or a NARC to walk into sight of his guns before I get the -chance- to fire on his position?
Or - let's say I'm doing this on my own - I have to chase him around the corner of the building just to keep him from breaking LOS halfway through the missile trajectory?
At that point, the only thing I'm "good" for is to simply fire missiles to make him move or accept attrition. The only time I will ever do damage is if I'm next to point blank into an enemy, they let me sit there and shoot at them over an open expanse, or they accept the attrition of my missiles.
I mean - who is lining up to play that role?
Which is why I say that the burden needs to be shifted onto acquiring the lock in the first place. This gives a bit of opportunity to 'peek and shoot' while not completely rendering missiles ineffective at dealing with intermittent targets (since the lock is pretty much set in stone once the missiles are fired - no new locks, no dropped locks - the longer you hold the lock button - the more missiles lock but the more likely your contact drops away; the shorter you hold down the lock button, the more missiles you waste when you release to launch).
But, like I said, at this point I'm describing a different game.
12
