894 replies to this topic

[Khobai]

Quote

It was not because of ECM.

Funny because as soon as I started using ECM mechs I had zero problems with LRMs. If they cant lockon they cant do any damage to you.

[Adiuvo]

Khobai, on 24 June 2014 - 10:13 AM, said:

Funny because as soon as I started using ECM mechs I had zero problems with LRMs. If they cant lockon they cant do any damage to you.

LRMs weren't used in comp play because you couldn't pick the map.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 09:59 AM, said:

Nope, never said they're great.

I said that they have the possibility of being used (like 1 LRM boat) on a few maps and it wouldn't be detrimental to the team.

That's very very very very (x5) far from great.

I'm pretty sure none of our conversations in the recent thread involved 1 LRM boat.

I'm pretty sure I mentioned 3-4 LRM boats multiple times and you kept saying it would be fine.

[Pygar]

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 10:14 AM, said:

LRMs weren't used in comp play because you couldn't pick the map.

Well, if LRMs are map dependent to be good in tournament play, but Pop Tarting isn't....what does that tell you about game balance?

Man, I can't wait to see the Jump Jet nerf...I don't think it's enough, but at least it's something after all this time.

Edited by Pygar, 24 June 2014 - 10:20 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

LRMs weren't used in comp play because you couldn't pick the map.

No LRMs werent used in competitive play because they were completely terrible. They required massive tonnage on top of having numerous counters. And theyre outright inferior at direct fire than other weapons. Even during LRMgeddon when missiles came in at a high angle and ignored terrain, they were still hard countered by ECM. I remember because I started using ECM in response and LRMs stopped being an issue as long as I didnt let myself get tagged which wasnt difficult.

However its possible that Clan LRMs will be competitive now that theyre half the weight and NARC has been considerably buffed. Also the min range on Clan LRMs is being reduced so they can do damage under 180m. We'll see how that plays out, but I still suspect CERPPC/Gauss will be more popular.

Quote

Well, if LRMs are map dependent to be good in tournament play, but Pop Tarting isn't....what does that tell you about game balance?

This. Ideally LRMs should be useful but not overpowered on every map.

Edited by Khobai, 24 June 2014 - 10:23 AM.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Wispsy, on 24 June 2014 - 09:58 AM, said:

I have even said multiple times there is very little real cover from a 733 LRM boat if they position themselves correctly.

What is this "correct position"? Just curious to hear your take on it.

[Philldoe]

Heim, I salute your effort to bring this post to the forums, but you're basicly explaining Particle Physics to the short bus. These people lack the mental acuity to understand the reasoning behind the words.

[Adiuvo]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 24 June 2014 - 10:18 AM, said:

I'm pretty sure none of our conversations in the recent thread involved 1 LRM boat.

I'm pretty sure I mentioned 3-4 LRM boats multiple times and you kept saying it would be fine.

Nope, I remember you mentioned the 3-4 thing once, I replied something akin to "...most teams wouldn't bring 3-4, maybe 1-2."

Pygar, on 24 June 2014 - 10:18 AM, said:

Well, if LRMs are map dependent to be good in tournament play, but Pop Tarting isn't....what does that tell you about game balance?

Man, I can't wait to see the Jump Jet nerf...I don't think it's enough, but at least it's something after all this time.

Well I don't necessarily want LRMs to be good in all situations since they're auto aim... but yes a big problem with jumpsnipers is that they're the best general loadout you can bring when you don't know what map you're on. Even if you do know the map they're still incredibly powerful. Hopefully JJ tweaks will help things.

Khobai, on 24 June 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

No LRMs werent used in competitive play because they were completely terrible. They required massive tonnage on top of having numerous counters. And theyre outright inferior at direct fire than other weapons. Even during LRMgeddon when missiles came in at a high angle and ignored terrain, they were still hard countered by ECM. I remember because I started using ECM in response and LRMs stopped being an issue as long as I didnt let myself get tagged which wasnt difficult.

However its possible that Clan LRMs will be competitive now that theyre half the weight and NARC has been considerably buffed. Also the min range on Clan LRMs is being reduced so they can do damage under 180m. We'll see how that plays out, but I still suspect CERPPC/Gauss will be more popular.



This. Ideally LRMs should be useful but not overpowered on every map.

LRMs are useful for their added damage that can be done without LOS. Again, the only reason they weren't brought in comp play was because of the maps. If you got a **** map and you had an LRM boat, well there goes quite a bit of useful tonnage.

Out of curiosity, have you ever played competitively in any of the bigger tourneys (Marik, RHoD, etc.)? If so, what team have you played for?

Edited by Adiuvo, 24 June 2014 - 10:27 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

LRMs are useful for their added damage that can be done without LOS.

Radar deprivation module basically killed off LRM indirect fire overnight. The only way it works is if you NARC a target and they dont have ECM or terrain to hide behind. And thats a lot of ifs to make LRMs work.

Quote

Out of curiosity, have you ever played competitively in any of the bigger tourneys

Ive won solo tournaments. I dont play 12 mans though because theyre boring as all hell. I find competitive play to be extremely stagnant and one-sided and theres far more variation in dropping solo or in small groups. 12 mans bring back too many bad memories from mechwarrior 4.

Edited by Khobai, 24 June 2014 - 10:33 AM.

[Adiuvo]

Khobai, on 24 June 2014 - 10:29 AM, said:

Radar deprivation module basically killed off LRM indirect fire overnight. The only way it works is if you NARC a target and they dont have ECM or terrain to hide behind. And thats a lot of ifs to make LRMs work.

Indirect fire is still possible when you have a friendly engaged with a mech. LRMs are a (relatively) free damage multiplier that are used to increase the damage being dealt to mechs friendlies are already engaged with.

[Mystere]

Wispsy, on 24 June 2014 - 09:55 AM, said:

I am not sure what you are talking about...we were clearly talking about if LRMs were buffed to the level that they would be viable in all competitive games (not just op on Caustic).

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 09:59 AM, said:

Nope, never said they're great.

I said that they have the possibility of being used (like 1 LRM boat) on a few maps and it wouldn't be detrimental to the team.

That's very very very very (x5) far from great.

Slightly tangent but ...

Considering that a lot of people, especially top players, claim that balancing should be done from the top because it trickes down, isn't buffing LRMs the right thing to do in the name of game balance?

[Kh0rn]

I would like too also see the end of the bunny hop battles where these so called uber leet players exploit the HSR when there mech ( unrealistically ) snaps back down too the ground. That force alone would break something and pretty much the spine of the pilot and noted it looks really stupid. I am still waiting for when you need too land correctly if not well you fall over. It would stop most of this HAWKEN like madness. I am sicken by the fact that only a handful of many mechs we have is viable at the top Elo. So you are a BT fan and love the Awesome sorry for you non comp GTFO. I was thrown out of a comp 12 man cause they would not let me run my Atlas that is absolute bullshit. Reason why I only do non meta 12 mans or stock mech Mondays.

[Koniks]

Mystere, on 24 June 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

Slightly tangent but ...

Considering that a lot of people, especially top players, claim that balancing should be done from the top because it trickes down, isn't buffing LRMs the right thing to do in the name of game balance?

Competitive players don't want weapons like streaks and LRMs getting buffed because of how they define aiming skill. See Adiuvo's comments here or the comments made in NGNG podcasts and game feeds for examples.

As long as a weapon is lock-on, even if the lock has numerous counters, they'd want it to be niche, complementary equipment at best. See, e.g. their support for artillery and air strikes as support weapons because you have to manually aim it, even though it randomly provides headshots and splashes a ridiculous amount of damage everywhere.

I wonder how much difference it would make to gameplay if instead of the incoming missile warning after the last one leaves the tubes, we had a missile lock indicator.

Edited by Mizeur, 24 June 2014 - 10:47 AM.

[Ngamok]

heimdelight - I have read your OP and while I liked it, there are certain things I agree with but also some I disagree but then that's why we have discussions and I liked your overall post.

In any FPS game and any MMO game, pinpoint damage and burst damage is always king. Sure there are weapons and abilities that have damage over time and are inferior unless they are cast and forget type effects that amplify direct damage attacks. But as I've played many FPS and MMOs in my time, yes high burst damage before you can react has always been the way to go. We have learned that in this game but it transcends pretty much every game.

In regards to the weapon types. We can't have everything be the same otherwise we'll never have any flavor to the game. As for buffing the IS AC 10/20 I have to disagree especially to the 20. Them doing their pinpoint damage vs. the clan 4-5 shell burst mechanic is fine especially as since there is a range trade off. The 10 on the other hand has a very limited role as it pairs up with Large Lasers quite nice I suppose. Again, every weapon can't have the same role. Which I jumped the gun from your solution section.

TTK has gotten shorter sure, but it's because of the vast amount of hard points we have and the weapons we can carry. Can we limit it? Other than hard point size restrictions, we really can't and if we do that, then people will just run what can carry their preferred weapon choices. Of course we'd have to do that on a chassis by chassis basis. CDA-3C can carry a PPC because it has one as stock but the others can't. None the other lights can save for the Adder / Puma. But overall I agree with what you said.

As regards to Lights. In pure pug matches on the lower end of the ELO, the really good pilots make it work whereas on the higher end, it's harder. This is really tricky to balance I think. Maybe they should give the IS lights the same quirk as the Clan lights where they have 5% more leg internals. Or just give all lights on both sides 5-10% more internals overall. but not armor. We can't make Locusts viable. I believe that anyone who wants to pilot one opts in for the challenge. We have that option to try to push ourselves to do well in something that has a hard time surviving. People who mostly play these types of games always go towards the easy path rather than pushing themselves. I like the challenge.

For your point on ranged engagements vs. brawling. Brawling against well set teams is harder to achieve. It's a map fault. If maps had more ways to get around I don't think there would be as much an issue. Especially if there were more avenues of approach that weren't always open or long hallways. I'll use your final match as an example on Crimson Straits. The very end a brawl ensued somewhat in the city portion of the map near the side tunnel entrance. I say a brawl as everyone was within moderate range 400-600m. If more maps had areas of the map that can support those types of fights, I feel it would cut down the need to have Alpine type sniping. Sure every map can support sniping, but not every map can support a brawl.

I agree with your statement on weapon balance and jump jets. I also agree with your assessment on the Timber Wolf. I also would like to add the Dire Wolf into this mostly on the 6x Ballistic issue. There needs to be ghost heat added to the negative quirks for this type of set up because honestly, carrying 6x AC5 (LB-X, UAC, Regular) or 4x 10s is going to become an issue. That issue is once 4x3 comes in and the other mechs can't mob them because of whatever reason. I agree with your Clan ER PPC solution. I agree with your Clan Laser and Pulse Laser solution. I also think missiles are fine because ECM, AMS (Kit Fox 3x AMS with Overload is fun), Terrain, and Deprivation Module.

And this is just my opinions. Nothing I stated is fact but my view. If you don't like any of it that's fine as long as we have a friendly discussion.

[Pygar]

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 10:27 AM, said:

Well I don't necessarily want LRMs to be good in all situations since they're auto aim...

I just mentioned this a few posts back- THIS^ is a big problem in this game, because LRMs should be a factor in the "Rock, Paper, Scissors" big picture of overall balance of the game... but instead of recognizing how much "aiming" or other work it takes to get LRMs to hit the enemy (because they are NOT automatic, lock on mechanics or not) we get to hear about how direct fire pilots have disdain for them. (I fly both, and while my KDRs are nothing special, my KDRs are almost exactly equal in my direct fire and LRM boats... I don't like being told that LRMs don't require any skill at all, because it isn't true.)

[Adiuvo]

Mystere, on 24 June 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

Slightly tangent but ...

Considering that a lot of people, especially top players, claim that balancing should be done from the top because it trickes down, isn't buffing LRMs the right thing to do in the name of game balance?

Yes, LRMs need a buff. However, in hopes of not making them even more annoying and oh-my-god-my-cockpit-rock-much-smoke-much-explosion I think they could do with a mechanic change. Siriothrax had a great post on the subject that I agreed wholeheartedly with, though I'm having some trouble finding it... I'll post again when I do.

Mizeur, on 24 June 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

Competitive players don't want weapons like streaks and LRMs getting buffed because of how they define aiming skill. See Adiuvo's comments here or the comments made in NGNG podcasts and game feeds for examples.

As long as a weapon is lock-on, even if the lock has numerous counters, they'd want it to be niche, complementary equipment at best. See, e.g. their support for artillery and air strikes as support weapons because you have to manually aim it, even though it randomly provides headshots and splashes a ridiculous amount of damage everywhere.

I wonder how much difference it would make to gameplay if instead of the incoming missile warning after the last one leaves the tubes, we had a missile lock indicator.

Lock on weapons are easier to use than direct fire weapons. At least with lasers vs. ballistics it's kind of a toss up since lasers are hitscan and ballistics have travel time, but no, I do not particularly like the current targeting and tracking mechanic for missiles.

I do think LRMs need to be more useful in more situations - buffed. However, with that needs to come some kind of change to the mechanics to make it more skill intensive.

[Pygar]

/Thread Over.

Should have been over a while back, but not hanging around to hear opinions of how one kind of weapon is more "honorable" than another.

Edited by Pygar, 24 June 2014 - 11:00 AM.

[Ngamok]

Adiuvo, on 22 June 2014 - 11:47 AM, said:

In my games, and Heim's, we don't see more CERLL usage than CERPPC. What the general populace brings doesn't really matter anyways. Meta is trickle down and given that clans just released stuff is still being experimented with by a lot of players. Comp players, however, have gravitated towards ERPPC/Gauss.

Clans are built for DPS, except for the ERPPC and the gauss. That is why these two weapons are being used. Heat is negated due to the amount of double heatsinks a clan mech can run. The Timberwolf is somewhat hotter than a Cataphract of the same build but it moving so fast is a massive, massive boon.

4 ERPPC is a build nobody would use a competitive setting. What will be used are the 2xERPPC 1xGauss Mad Cats, which are broken beyond belief. You basically have a Dragon Slayer that's much faster, tankier, and spreads damage better.

This is very true.

[Wispsy]

Mystere, on 24 June 2014 - 10:36 AM, said:

Slightly tangent but ...

Considering that a lot of people, especially top players, claim that balancing should be done from the top because it trickes down, isn't buffing LRMs the right thing to do in the name of game balance?

I think you have taken this thought a tad far. Yes ideally LRMs should have a different implementation. However, as they are currently unlikely to be changed at any point in the near future as this is the implementation they have had basically from the start...then buffing them would harm lower levels more then it would help game balance. In most games you will have a weapon or hero or champion with a very easy to use kit that can do well at average levels, but with a very low skill ceiling, so you can only truly take it so far, as classes with a higher skill ceiling get the room to outplay it...due to it being super easy but with a very low skill ceiling...else everybody would just play it all the time and nothing else until the very very top because there is zero way to outplay it and it is really hard to **** up so playing anything else would be pointless except as a personal challenge. LRMs do serve this purpose.

Edited by Wispsy, 24 June 2014 - 11:04 AM.

[Mystere]

Mizeur, on 24 June 2014 - 10:43 AM, said:

Competitive players don't want weapons like streaks and LRMs getting buffed because of how they define aiming skill. See Adiuvo's comments here or the comments made in NGNG podcasts and game feeds for examples.

As long as a weapon is lock-on, even if the lock has numerous counters, they'd want it to be niche, complementary equipment at best. See, e.g. their support for artillery and air strikes as support weapons because you have to manually aim it, even though it randomly provides headshots and splashes a ridiculous amount of damage everywhere.

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 10:53 AM, said:

Yes, LRMs need a buff. However, in hopes of not making them even more annoying and oh-my-god-my-cockpit-rock-much-smoke-much-explosion I think they could do with a mechanic change. Siriothrax had a great post on the subject that I agreed wholeheartedly with, though I'm having some trouble finding it... I'll post again when I do.

Lock on weapons are easier to use than direct fire weapons. At least with lasers vs. ballistics it's kind of a toss up since lasers are hitscan and ballistics have travel time, but no, I do not particularly like the current targeting and tracking mechanic for missiles.

I do think LRMs need to be more useful in more situations - buffed. However, with that needs to come some kind of change to the mechanics to make it more skill intensive.

Ok, so in summary, LRMs are considered as "no-skill" or "low-skill" weapons.

My only reaction is: So what?

Really good players should have no trouble dealing with players using so-called "no-skill" or "low-skill" equipment.





And I hope somebody did not miss the irony vis-a-vis poptarts.

<saw Wispsy's comment after posting this; will respond to that one later ... if at all )

Edited by Mystere, 24 June 2014 - 11:20 AM.