894 replies to this topic

[cSand]

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

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.

Hey, those of us on the short bus salute you too:

Edited by cSand, 24 June 2014 - 11:22 AM.

[Blacksoul1987]

Mystere, on 24 June 2014 - 11:13 AM, said:

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.

to be honest I think buffing lrms with their current implementation would probably make a lot of people quit. It is definitely the thing I see people complaining about most in PUGs at this point in time

[Adiuvo]

Mystere, on 24 June 2014 - 11:13 AM, said:

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.

Right now good players don't have many problems dealing LRM boats. Average players, judging by the many threads on the forums, do have problems dealing with LRM boats and think they're the most OP thing ever. The weird problem with LRMs is, how do you buff them given the current mechanics? Increase the speed? OK, more annoying for the average MWO pilot, still pointless to bring unless you know the map for comp people. The actual problem with LRMs on certain maps is cover. How do we fix this? Increase their angle of descent? Alright... that probably would get them used in comp. And cause the forums to explode. And remove the ability to outplay LRMs short of tacking on ECM to every drop deck ever (hard counters suck BTW).

LRMs need a mechanic overhaul for them to be useful at all levels. They're a fickle thing to balance precisely because the skill investment in using them is so low.

As for poptarts, they fit in the 'easy to use hard to master' thing. The skill ceiling with jumpsnipers is quite high. If you don't believe that and feel that jumpsnipers are easy to master and that you have, in fact, mastered them, feel free to fight Proton, Kaffeangst, JagerXII, ThePieMaker, Heimdelight, TwinkyOverlord, Trevelyas, Gman129, Schopenhauer, etc..

Edited by Adiuvo, 24 June 2014 - 11:26 AM.

[Mystere]

Blacksoul1987, on 24 June 2014 - 11:20 AM, said:

to be honest I think buffing lrms with their current implementation would probably make a lot of people quit. It is definitely the thing I see people complaining about most in PUGs at this point in time

Flashback to 2014( ) ...

GPS + Triangulation + Network Communications + Missile Guidance Systems --> kinda how missiles work today.


Seriously though, how should LRMs be changed?

Edited by Mystere, 24 June 2014 - 11:26 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 09:26 AM, said:

No, House of Lords is not good enough that we can go against Steel Jaguar in Awesomes and Cicadas and win with any degree of regularity if they're able to use the typical Dragon Slayers and 3Ds.

In matched fights, however, we are able to beat them with regularity.

Now, can we beat other teams in Awesomes and Cicadas easily? Yes. In the top top tier though, let's say the top 3 teams, the difference in skill is not so large that it can overcome the crapiness of those chassis.

Then you are not the best. You are just really good.

[jd7710]

This is the reason i stopped playing COD. Too many campers! If your lrm boat or a pop tart the only skill you show is hiding. The best games played are the ones where people actually talk to each other and use tactics. Even after the clan release some of my best matches were in Kintaro variants andGriffins. Basically if you can't take the heat get out of the kitchen. If anything she be nerfed its the people crying that their particular play still has to change cause they can't kill half a team anymore. And as I recall of we are following the timeline the clans swept everyone aside till the battle of Wolcott because of their superior technology.

[Adiuvo]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 June 2014 - 11:25 AM, said:

Then you are not the best. You are just really good.

Despite us beating all other teams in competitive play and having an undefeated record?

Uh, alright. You have an odd definition of the best... but I'll live with it.

[Mystere]

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

Right now good players don't have many problems dealing LRM boats. Average players, judging by the many threads on the forums, do have problems dealing with LRM boats and think they're the most OP thing ever. The weird problem with LRMs is, how do you buff them given the current mechanics? Increase the speed? OK, more annoying for the average MWO pilot, still pointless to bring unless you know the map for comp people. The actual problem with LRMs on certain maps is cover. How do we fix this? Increase their angle of descent? Alright... that probably would get them used in comp. And cause the forums to explode. And remove the ability to outplay LRMs short of tacking on ECM to every drop deck ever (hard counters suck BTW).

LRMs need a mechanic overhaul for them to be useful at all levels. They're a fickle thing to balance precisely because the skill investment in using them is so low.

So, how should LRM mechanics be changed?

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

As for poptarts, they fit in the 'easy to use hard to master' thing. The skill ceiling with jumpsnipers is quite high ...

I was just pointing out the irony that exists in all these "XXX is no-skill" threads.

Edited by Mystere, 24 June 2014 - 11:37 AM.

[Blacksoul1987]

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

Right now good players don't have many problems dealing LRM boats. Average players, judging by the many threads on the forums, do have problems dealing with LRM boats and think they're the most OP thing ever. The weird problem with LRMs is, how do you buff them given the current mechanics? Increase the speed? OK, more annoying for the average MWO pilot, still pointless to bring unless you know the map for comp people. The actual problem with LRMs on certain maps is cover. How do we fix this? Increase their angle of descent? Alright... that probably would get them used in comp. And cause the forums to explode. And remove the ability to outplay LRMs short of tacking on ECM to every drop deck ever (hard counters suck BTW).

LRMs need a mechanic overhaul for them to be useful at all levels. They're a fickle thing to balance precisely because the skill investment in using them is so low.

As for poptarts, they fit in the 'easy to use hard to master' thing. The skill ceiling with jumpsnipers is quite high. If you don't believe that and feel that jumpsnipers are easy to master and that you have, in fact, mastered them, feel free to fight Proton, Kaffeangst, JagerXII, ThePieMaker, Heimdelight, TwinkyOverlord, Trevelyas, Gman129, Schopenhauer, etc..

Proton is OP needs a nerf

[Joseph Mallan]

SLDF DeathlyEyes, on 24 June 2014 - 09:48 AM, said:

It is worse because there is literally nothing you can do. Example you are a lone pugger and you drop on caustic valley. Someone narcs you with clan narc. WARNING INCOMING MISSILE. Run for cover..... Oh wait the LRMs go over all of it. Run for someone with ECM. Oh no you solo dropped and no one happens to have ECM. AMS doesn't really help either. You slowly watch for 30 seconds as your mech disintegrates while there is literally nothing you can do to prevent it. Then you get to search for another 5 minutes in search queue. At least you can go behind a wall and get out of the line of fire from ppc+ac meta. At least the people doing the shooting have to do some degree of aiming.

Not to mention if matchmaker worked the way its suppose to no noob should end up in a match where a bunch of players can consistently 3 shot kill him with pin point PPC+AC mechs. LRMs any idiot with a few friends can easily narc then LRM a mech to death. Especially on maps like Caustic Valley that literally have no cover on them.

This sounds like a lot of "Its not my fault". To date every death I have suffered took LRMs, Energy and Ballistics to complete. Or two of the three, but never Just Missiles, or Just Ballistics. So to my encounters I don't see a need to keep LRMs out of the mix. And if the top tier Don't like missiles I think it is a good sign we need them made more effective. Caustic has little cover, there isn't a single map with out any cover.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

The problem with LRMs is, how do you buff them given the current mechanics?

You can't. Too many variables. They need to be redone from the ground up. Which PGI has said they were going to do twice if my memory serves...then didn't. And by PGI I mean Paul.

You can't account for 4 different launcher types (now technically 8 with Clans), ECM, AMS which assists and stacks, AMS Range, AMS Overload, Adv Decay, Radar Dep, TAG, NARC, Artemis, BAP, Missile Warning and the fact that you might have anywhere from 1 to 12 mechs with anywhere from 0 to 6 LRM launchers of various sizes in any game.

And LASTLY, you can't account for which map you land on or which game type.

So when you drop into a match, you have all of the above deciding whether your LRMs are going to suck, be viable, be good or be amazing.

And that doesn't even bring skill or cover into consideration.

AMS needs to be self only, both Decay modules need to go away, ECM needs to counter TAG/NARC/Artemis and then they need to cut the restriction for who can mount ECM.

All counter ECM needs to go away at that point.

Indirect Fire needs to be reworked to be less viable and direct fire needs to be made more viable.

When you do all that, you can really look at balancing LRMs.

Edited by Nicholas Carlyle, 24 June 2014 - 11:33 AM.

[Koniks]

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 11:23 AM, said:

LRMs need a mechanic overhaul for them to be useful at all levels. They're a fickle thing to balance precisely because the skill investment in using them is so low.

Adjusting the heat cap and then tweaking cooldown and heat values would do the trick. It doesn't require a completely new aiming mechanic. It really is a one size fits all solution.

It just requires preventing players from firing LRMs like their one mech is a Katyusha rocket battalion.

That being said, I'm not opposed to indirect fire requiring some manual aiming like a mortar if a target isn't NARC'd or TAG'd.

Edited by Mizeur, 24 June 2014 - 11:38 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 24 June 2014 - 11:32 AM, said:

You can't. Too many variables. They need to be redone from the ground up. Which PGI has said they were going to do twice if my memory serves...then didn't. And by PGI I mean Paul.

You can't account for 4 different launcher types (now technically 8 with Clans), ECM, AMS which assists and stacks, AMS Range, AMS Overload, Adv Decay, Radar Dep, TAG, NARC, Artemis, BAP, Missile Warning and the fact that you might have anywhere from 1 to 12 mechs with anywhere from 0 to 6 LRM launchers of various sizes in any game.

And LASTLY, you can't account for which map you land on or which game type.

So when you drop into a match, you have all of the above deciding whether your LRMs are going to suck, be viable, be good or be amazing.

And that doesn't even bring skill or cover into consideration.

AMS needs to be self only, both Decay modules need to go away, ECM needs to counter TAG/NARC/Artemis and then they need to cut the restriction for who can mount ECM.

All counter ECM needs to go away at that point.

Indirect Fire needs to be reworked to be less viable and direct fire needs to be made more viable.

When you do all that, you can really look at balancing LRMs.

I like this list, my suggestion to making Indirect fire more difficult is to make my missile lock time take longer is I am using a spotter. After that the lock seems to be lost quickly enough for me. I don't use modules for target decay or the like and I have my fair share of grumbles because of it. BUT I SHOULD HAVE THOSE GRUMBLES!

[Be Rough With Me Plz]

I've got a question regarding the pre-nerfed Victor: How was the torso twist compared to the current Timberwolf?

I've only been playing this particular game for a month or so, but I've been playing all the Battletech games since MechCommander on Zone.com (Mpiggies can go DIE!). So, conceptually, I believe I have a firm grasp on comparative gameplay between the various Battletech encarnations.

I've only read the first 14-15 pages before it kinda devolved into a flamewar, but as a Victor brawler, I haven't really had an issue 1v1'ing any of the new clan mechs using an XL 360 engine using an AC20/srm16 loadout. I usually lead the charge/initiate fights so thinking of a more agile Victor makes me drool.

Seemed like the main/initial complaint revolved around the superb handling of the Timberwolf chassis combined with the "poptart" playstyle. (Which is understandable considering it was the backbone of the Clan forces)

If the Victor regained its mobility, comparable to that of the Timberwolf considering there is only a 5 ton difference, how would this argument change? Would there even be an argument?

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 June 2014 - 11:37 AM, said:

I like this list, my suggestion to making Indirect fire more difficult is to make my missile lock time take longer is I am using a spotter. After that the lock seems to be lost quickly enough for me. I don't use modules for target decay or the like and I have my fair share of grumbles because of it. BUT I SHOULD HAVE THOSE GRUMBLES!

Well there has been the idea floated that each time you fire, lock is dropped. I think that could work well for indirect fire. But may be too much of a penalty for direct fire.

The main thing is to make indirect fire difficult and make direct fire more rewarding.

Also, I'm good with looking at really changing the cockpit shake mechanic, I feel like that is a psychological issue which causes more threads than the actual LRM damage does.

[SilentWolff]

Adiuvo, on 24 June 2014 - 11:27 AM, said:

Despite us beating all other teams in competitive play and having an undefeated record?

Uh, alright. You have an odd definition of the best... but I'll live with it.

While I salute your skill and victory in the tourney, you didn't beat all other teams in competitive play. You just beat the teams that happened to enter that particular tourney.

When CW comes out and the wins and loses really matter, then we will see what the real deal is.

[Wispsy]

Joseph Mallan, on 24 June 2014 - 11:25 AM, said:

Then you are not the best. You are just really good.

If nobody is better how does that prove we are not the best?

I mean I am not saying it as a team thing here, obviously I consider myself the best at all things...but ya...being the best is about being better then everybody else, not being on a mythical level never reachable due to physics and mechanics...

[Blacksoul1987]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 24 June 2014 - 11:40 AM, said:

Well there has been the idea floated that each time you fire, lock is dropped. I think that could work well for indirect fire. But may be too much of a penalty for direct fire.

The main thing is to make indirect fire difficult and make direct fire more rewarding.

Also, I'm good with looking at really changing the cockpit shake mechanic, I feel like that is a psychological issue which causes more threads than the actual LRM damage does.

the motion blur from the cockpit shake also severely dropped my frame rate before I upgraded to a core i7, chainfired lrm 5s ore streak 2s could essentially block your vision entirely and lag up low end machines until the victim dies.

[Nicholas Carlyle]

Wispsy, on 24 June 2014 - 11:44 AM, said:

If nobody is better how does that prove we are not the best?

I mean I am not saying it as a team thing here, obviously I consider myself the best at all things...but ya...being the best is about being better then everybody else, not being on a mythical level never reachable due to physics and mechanics...

I'm just quoting this.

Pride is an ugly thing.

[Wispsy]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 24 June 2014 - 11:45 AM, said:

I'm just quoting this.

Pride is an ugly thing.

Logic is an ugly thing?