It's always amusing to see posts like this one, where there is a general cry to get rid of a weapon because 'there are too many of them on the battlefield'. Yet, how many lasers, how many autocannon, how many gauss rifles are similarly on the field, and not a peep of concern about them.
LRMs are the target of so much flack because there are players who cannot understand any weapon that is not direct-fire. To them, LRMs are 'unfair', 'lazy', and 'no-skill', which are just substitutes for 'something I can't deal with'. Why? Because no other weapon has the number of counter-measures, disadvantages, and number of requirements to use successfully than this one weapons system. ECM, AMS, Cover, absolute lowest projectile speed in he game by far, the requirement of a lock-on, the requirement the firing mech maintain that lock-on through the entire flight time of those projectiles, a very long minimum range, Radar Depravation module, and the spreading of damage across the target when there -is- a hit are all obstacles an LRM unit has to overcome every moment of the battle to get their weapons to do damage. This in addition to the normal problems of ammo-based weapons. This makes the idea that LRMs are in any way a weapon not requiring skill an utterly blind statement. They require a -different- set of skills in addition to the ones other weapons use, and because of that, certain players cannot accept their existence in what is, to them, supposed to be only a point-and-click game.
To say you can't deal with such disadvantaged weapons when you have no problem with gauss boats, autocannon boats, PPC boats, Laser boats, and everything else in between, points not to a problem with the weapon, but of the pilot.
Finally, let me clue you in on how LRMs -originally- were designed to work. They fired at the same rate as every other weapon, they travelled to their targets at the same rate as every other weapon (i.e. instantly, no time to evade), they had only an increasing chance to miss with their minimum range, not a full magical mitigation of all damage at 180 meters. They did not require lock-ons. They were not affected in the least by ECM. They could be fired indirectly either with another unit spotting, or by the firing unit spotting for itself. They outranged almost every other weapon in the game.
And they were still regarded as secondary weapons except on mechs designed to use them in quantity, the 'boats' so many decry.
LRMs in MWO are a shadow of what they are supposed to be, and suffer a great many penalties for the abilities they do have. Those who want LRMs to lose their indirect fire ability should be aware they are also advocating the removal of minimum range and lock-on requirements for these weapons at the same time, as both of these are only in the game to balance out the unique ability of LRMs to fire indirectly. Remove that ability, and those restrictions -must- go as well.
So stop crying about LRMs not requiring skill to use or that they have to somehow be artificially limited in number. Every other weapon in the game is both easier to use and uncontrolled in the numbers each side can take, so don't go telling me we have to put -more- restrictions on LRM usage without also limiting the numbers of -every- -other- -weapon- in the game. The next time you face a line of heavies all sporting twin gauss rifles, think about how grateful you are that they weren't LRM boats because you are convinced you will last a lot longer against the dozen+ gauss rifles all hitting you.
Edited by Jakob Knight, 18 June 2014 - 08:38 PM.
4
Levi Porphyrogenitus, on 18 June 2014 - 02:04 PM, said:
