684 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

LRMs just need to be less efficient unless used with Artemis IV.

I disagree. LRMs are already less effective than direct fire weapons.

The only thing aberrant about LRMs is their absurdly high impulse and thats ALL that needs to be nerfed. They have three times the impulse of an AC20 for no good reason.

Artemis does need a buff too though. I recommend giving Artemis a 5%-10% crit chance bonus for SRMs and LRMs. Artemis is simply not worth the tonnage or crits it takes up right now.

Quote

Even the mighty Direwhale is no match for the OP FANG!

If you say so

Spoiler

Edited by Khobai, 21 July 2014 - 06:47 PM.

[Lynx7725]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 06:42 PM, said:

The only thing aberrant about LRMs is their absurdly high impulse and thats ALL that needs to be nerfed. They have three times the impulse of an AC20 for no good reason.

Personally I think the LRM5 reload rate may need an adjustment to be longer too, since the TrolLRM Cat is one major irritant running around (well, less now). But do that and that build may become non-viable too.. it's already marginal as it is.

[Khobai]

Quote

Personally I think the LRM5 reload rate may need an adjustment to be longer too, since the TrolLRM Cat is one major irritant running around (well, less now). But do that and that build may become non-viable too.. it's already marginal as it is.

Ideally the cooldown should be increased but the damage per missile should also be increased to keep the dps the same. That would increase the armor penetration on LRMs and make them compete better with direct fire weapons. Also from a common sense perspective its not logical that an LRM20 reloads so much faster than an SSRM6.

But the #1 problem with LRMs right now is the ridiculously high impulse. If thats lowered to reasonable levels I dont think LRMs would be nearly as bad anymore. Its the fact they fire so fast combined with absurdly high impulse, especially the clan LRMs because they hit you one at a time, and each one shakes you with three times the force of an AC20.

Edited by Khobai, 21 July 2014 - 06:53 PM.

[Lynx7725]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 06:49 PM, said:

Ideally the cooldown should be increased but the damage per missile also increased to keep the dps the same. That would increase the armor penetration on LRMs and make them compete better with direct fire weapons. Also from a common sense perspective its not logical that an LRM20 reloads so much faster than an SSRM6.

Why would I want LRMs to compete with DF weapons? LRMs is the only thing that can deliberately IF (semi-deliberately, ACs can also IF, but... tricky). From a differentiating point of view, why add to the DF pool when there are much better weapons there?

The SSRM6 issue, honestly you'd have to ask PGI. There's no good reason for it to take that long..

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 06:49 PM, said:

But the #1 problem with LRMs right now is the ridiculously high impulse. If thats lowered to reasonable levels I dont think LRMs would be nearly as bad anymore. Its the fact they fire so fast combined with absurdly high impulse, especially the clan LRMs because they hit you one at a time, and each one shakes you with three times the force of an AC20.

I think the impulse is a bit high too. But what would be a good value? If 3x AC20 is bad, how about 2.5x?

One problem we keep running into, is that we keep proposing solutions to the LRM "problem". But we've never asked ourselves, what is the role that PGI designed LRMs for.

[Khobai]

Quote

Why would I want LRMs to compete with DF weapons?

Uh for game balance? LRMs and direct fire weapons should be roughly equal. Instead of direct fire weapons being outright better. Despite their ability to indirect fire and their ridiculously high impulse, LRMs are still inferior to direct fire weapons like PPCs. They could be balanced a lot better.

Personally I think LRMs should fire way slower, have less impulse, more damage per missile, more range, and a faster travel speed (missiles should accelerate gradually upto their max speed though). Additionally artemis should be buffed to give a missile crit chance bonus to better justify its tonnage and crit slots.

Quote

think the impulse is a bit high too. But what would be a good value? If 3x AC20 is bad, how about 2.5x?

x2.5 is still too high. Why would getting hit with an LRM shake you more than getting hit with a huge 120mm slug? A good value would be less impulse than an AC20. LRMs should not shake you that much, it makes no sense at all.

Edited by Khobai, 21 July 2014 - 07:07 PM.

[Wolfways]

I'd like LRM's to compete with direct-fire weapons (although i know they will never truly compete because they spread the damage) because that's what LRM's are in BT, they just have the ability to be fired indirect.
In BT LRM's are one of my favourite weapons. In MWO they suck.

The weird thing about the impulse is that i've never really noticed it. I generally don't get hit by LRM's but just about a week ago i let a Timber Wolf pour its LRM20's on me while i fired at a Firestarter (standing still to see how long it took the missiles to kill me...they didn't) and i don't even remember my cockpit shaking much while i fought. Strange....

[Khobai]

well in tabletop LRMs could use different ammo types too. my personal favorite being follow the leader LRMs which made all the LRMs hit the same location. It basically allowed LRMs to do pinpoint damage and compete with other weapons like PPCs.

[Wolfways]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

x2.5 is still too high. Why would getting hit with an LRM shake you more than getting hit with a huge 120mm slug? A good value would be less impulse than an AC20. LRMs should not shake you that much, it makes no sense at all.

So should it be a little bit of impulse per missile, like getting hit by rapid AC2 fire?

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

x2.5 is still too high. Why would getting hit with an LRM shake you more than getting hit with a huge 120mm slug? A good value would be less impulse than an AC20. LRMs should not shake you that much, it makes no sense at all.

Cause on Impact the missile also explode? So kinetic impact + Concussive energy release= two times the impulse.

[Wolfways]

Joseph Mallan, on 21 July 2014 - 07:16 PM, said:

Cause on Impact the missile also explode? So kinetic impact + Concussive energy release= two times the impulse.

Except they removed the explosion, or at least the damage from it

[Joseph Mallan]

Wolfways, on 21 July 2014 - 07:24 PM, said:

Except they removed the explosion, or at least the damage from it

Well thats just silly!

[Khobai]

Quote

Cause on Impact the missile also explode? So kinetic impact + Concussive energy release= two times the impulse.

you do realize autocannon shells explode too?

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 07:27 PM, said:

you do realize autocannon shells explode too?

Depleted Uranium Penetrators say Nope!

And totally different type of explosion!

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 21 July 2014 - 07:36 PM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Depleted Uranium Penetrators say Nope!

Which isnt what mechs use. They fire HEAP rounds.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 07:32 PM, said:

Which isnt what mechs use. They fire HEAP rounds.

Depends on which fluff you are using Sir. Read the novels you get DU ammo, read Fluff in the Handbooks you get HEAP.

[Wolfways]

Joseph Mallan, on 21 July 2014 - 07:41 PM, said:

Depends on which fluff you are using Sir. Read the novels you get DU ammo, read Fluff in the Handbooks you get HEAP.

Sarna says HEAP or kinetic. No idea which PGI are using.

[Joseph Mallan]

Wolfways, on 21 July 2014 - 07:49 PM, said:

Sarna says HEAP or kinetic. No idea which PGI are using.

Likely something close to Sarna... Even though they let the Authors use DU ammo in most novels. So fluff v Fluff.

[Khobai]

Quote

Depends on which fluff you are using Sir. Read the novels you get DU ammo, read Fluff in the Handbooks you get HEAP.

Well given that you see explosions in MWO when AC rounds hit you id say HEAP.

[Joseph Mallan]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 08:12 PM, said:

Well given that you see explosions in MWO when AC rounds hit you id say HEAP.

LOL Now that is a bit better than Fluff. Now just how much High explosive and how is it shaped upon impact?

[Lynx7725]

Khobai, on 21 July 2014 - 07:01 PM, said:

Uh for game balance? LRMs and direct fire weapons should be roughly equal. Instead of direct fire weapons being outright better. Despite their ability to indirect fire and their ridiculously high impulse, LRMs are still inferior to direct fire weapons like PPCs. They could be balanced a lot better.

Just to be clear, I got nothing against Khobai or the changes he proposes, it's just that I have a different perspective is all.

I personally don't have the need to see someone in the eye to kill them dead in game, is all. While we can opt to see LRM as inferior in DF, the flip side of the coin is that LRMs are absolutely superior in IF. Utilization of a weapons system to its designed strength is key in game, so if PGI decided to design LRM to be strong in the IF arena, why would I want to keep comparing it to DF weapons?

MWO isn't exactly my playground -- PGI sets the rules. There are primary design rules and secondary design rules. PGI have proven willing to tweak secondary design rules as they wish/ see fit, but they don't mess with primary design rules much. That gives us a context we can work in.

Personally also, I see the shake and all of LRMs as a compensation for their weaker abilities in close. The total aspects of a weapon system should be considered in sum -- role, damage, heat, weight, criticals, accuracy, reload time, direct/ indirect stun effects, etc. all should be considered. I take the stunlock effect as a compensation for the low accuracy and poor direct damage, and use the weapon system accordingly.

Do I think there are aspects of LRMs that can be improved? Sure. There are secondary traits that I think can be tweaked. Do I want to change the role of the LRMs? I don't see the need personally, because that weapon system brings diversity to tactics and playstyles in the game.