27 replies to this topic

[DasSibby]

Mellifluer, on 04 August 2014 - 08:30 PM, said:

lrms need to be unguided and fast. really only clan lrms are supposed to home

i know it would leave the IS at a disadvantage kinda but really LRMS are either really good or really bad with all the counter/counter counters

I could actually buy that. It would go well with my idea of LRMs being more of a unguided support weapon than what they are currently.

Noth, on 04 August 2014 - 08:40 PM, said:

Really? Because I'm pretty sure the difference in lore between IS and clan LRMs (outside of the weight and slot differences) was that IS fired ballistically (fired up in an arc) and clan didn't (fired straight) with clan having no minimum range. Now in mechwarrior, LRMs have always been tracking.

This is actually what I'd like to see more of. I think the IS LRMs should basically fly in a parabola. It would still allow players to avoid them... but it'd provide an area denial effect as well. (Think of a weakened artillery effect that could be blocked by AMS or evasion. However without the lock-on mechanic a player could predict movement, and launch at his predicted target's spot.

Basically this would really increase the skill it takes for players to hit enemies, and yet it would really change up games.

Lily from animove, on 05 August 2014 - 12:05 AM, said:

LRM's are fine, the only time they are annoying is when you made the bad step of running into the open when every random bob can lock on you.

And go to the group queue, there aren't evbven that many LRM's in these matches.
Also, well, enough counters exist, but when people complain about LRM's and you figure out, you are the only AMS mech in the match, well find the mistake.
I normally do not run with ams, either on my novas. But I do not complain about LRMS's sinc ei knwo what they can do, can try to avoid it, or have to live with the fact that I willingly not used AMS. But its not the LRM fault when I die by them.

also, Long range missiles? fuel driven warheads that make my ERLL laugh at their range.

Well that's the problem with current LRMs. They aren't good... unless the enemy is out in the open. This literally is what stagnates matches. While I'm fine with taking a PPC shot to get a better position, there's no way I want to deal with 5 LRM boats targeting me while I flank someone.

Basically, we need to change it. LRM's currently make matches into a cold war that is won and lost by the first team to lose 3 mechs, followed by a rush.

Also, while I'm not a L33T player... I'm no noob. I can't recall the last time I've been killed by LRMs, and I don't do too badly considering I'm a casual player with all PUG drops. I just want to give the game some tactical variety.

So to all of the ad-hominem attackers out there?

Edited by DasSibby, 05 August 2014 - 07:12 AM.

[Felbombling]

wanderer, on 05 August 2014 - 05:58 AM, said:

And Capper?

No.

Spotting for LRMs in Battletech is -trivial-. As in, do you have a hillbilly with a walkie-talkie handy to call in fire? +1 to hit, done.

IDF and long-range fire is what LRMs are designed for- they're the first-generation "artillery" weapon for Battlemechs (with the Arrow IV being the second-generation system). At most, you reduce their tracking strength slightly to represent the marginal loss of accuracy. They are specifically there to negate line-of-sight firing issues, though Artemis bonuses should not apply, ever to IDF mode launching.

You forgot the part where the spotter is denied the ability to fire their own weapons, and their movement modifiers were added to the actual to-hit number in the table top game. I can see why you ignored that part though, because it weakened your point.

[wanderer]

Quote

You forgot the part where the spotter is denied the ability to fire their own weapons, and their movement modifiers were added to the actual to-hit number in the table top game. I can see why you ignored that part though, because it weakened your point.

Because you apparently missed a few rules changes from a decade+ back. Spotters are quite capable of firing while spotting. Do you even have Total Warfare, or are you basing this on some dusty copy of the old 1990's-era master rules? Things do change. It's +1 to hit for the spotter if he fires his own weapons and spots.

Far as movement modifiers go, please feel free to add the exact same modifiers that movement gives the spotting unit in MWO to the IDF lobber. That is, in MWO, zero. Fair's fair. If movement caused weapons to cone of fire or the like in MWO, I'd agree that making LRMs suffer similar losses in accuracy would be fair- but they don't.

[Apnu]

Weapons are imbalanced and boating them is a problem.

For all the crying about LRMs, its the direct fire weapon boating that's the problem.

LRMs have a many counters. No other weapon system in the game has as many counters as LRM. ECM. Reliance on locks or TAG for the duration of missile flight. Terrain. AMS. Double AMS. Triple AMS. 60% average payload hitting. Reliance on target locks, and again, reliance on target locks. Missiles have a fixed range then they go boom. All other weapons can fire over their max range and do some kind of damage.

Direct fire weapons have none of these counters. If you can see it, you can hit it. You don't need target lock, or even any kind of telemetry. If you see a blob in the distance that doesn't have a blue triangle, its an enemy and can be shot at. You don't even have to waste time hitting 'r'

Last night, on River City, we had a Highlander with a very competitive build. It was at 97% heath and took a 2 cERPPC and 2cGR shot to the CT and was cored dead on the spot. That's why direct fire weapons rule the meta and LRMs will never compete with them. Enemy Dire Wolf player even asked if he got a head shot, and our guy said, no, he cored the CT. The enemy player was shocked to hear that.

LRMs become an issue when the counters to it are over come or the enemy team members makes mistakes. Sure if some lone Dire Wolf trailing at the end of the pack tries to make a break from cover can die fast under sustained LRM fire, but it takes a lot of missiles to do that, from several mechs. Beyond that LRMs are a harassment weapon.

If the player is smart and uses cover and/or ECM, LRMs pose little threat. I know, I boat LRMs all the time. If I play 5 matches, 4 will be frustrating because the other team is packing 2 or 3 ECM mechs, staying in cover, and my team isn't doing a single thing to break the ECM or even bother to hit 'r' when brawling. So I'll add that to the list too, your own team counters LRMs by not bothering to hit 'r' on the mech they're engaged with. And then there's that 5th game when I land on a team that is hitting 'r', the map is fairly open (Caustic, Alpine perhaps) and the enemy team lacks much ECM cover and I can get some decent LOS w/out attracting 5 ERPPC shots to my face.

Leave LRMs alone. Addressing boating issues instead. And if that is done, then also keep players from boating LRMs and the problem will fix itself.

One suggestion from a guy in my unit was very interesting:

Implement a heat scale like TT. As mechs go over 100% heat capacity they should risk more than shut down. They should start moving more slowly and having HUD issues.

Another idea kicked around was to also put in some kind of power limits for the weapons. Want to fire 2 PPCs and 2 GRs? That's going to take a lot of wattage to power up. If Engines only produced so much wattage, then the player has can't alpha all those weapons systems. Let the engines wattage increase as the engine rating increases, giving players an incentive for bigger engines, which then has a weight tax on the rest of the mechs. Clans have a natural disadvantage then, because of the fixed engines. Sure they get better ranges, weights and crit slot usage, but being limited on wattage would balance that nicely.

We don't need to endlessly tinker and nerf all the weapons. We should look to other mechanics to provide game balance.

I think both ideas are very interesting and I'd love to see how they'd work in the game.

[EyeOne]

DasSibby, on 04 August 2014 - 08:19 PM, said:

So I've been thinking. How will everyone be happy with LRMs? Well? It's not going to happen.

Here's why.

The current set up appeases no-body. Currently LRM's aren't suited for face-to-face fights, and they aren't quite good enough for long range support kills. So... they should be one or the other (maybe with a range toggle?)

If the short range selection were changed to being a... sort of MRM, that could work. Up the damage but nix most of their guidance and range and create a mostly line-of-fire flight path.


For long range selection? Change them truly into a fire support weapon that moves a bit faster, is weaker, but also has more rounds per ton and launches into, and descends from a higher angle. (Think mortar fire.)

Overall I think that could work. Especially with a selector toggle that... say has a 8 second switch between ranges (say it's the missile racks re-aligning...). It could make them viable again as a front line, or support weapon as good players could be fire support, then storm into battle when needed.

It's just my idea, but I think this would add some much needed weapon diversity into the game. I can only imagine what battles would look like with this mechanic!

P.S. If a dev sees this, I love this game, and this critique is said in hopes of improving a game I already enjoy!

You just discribed MMLs. http://www.sarna.net...issile_Launcher

[Ph30nix]

first change they need to make to LRM's is to remove the ability to lock onto allies targets without the use of special equipment.

after that they can make alot of changes to LRM's to make them actually useful without being over powered.

[wanderer]

Quote

first change they need to make to LRM's is to remove the ability to lock onto allies targets without the use of special equipment.

It's the same equipment everyone else uses. A set of sensors. The only difference is you're borrowing locational data from a friendly to drop the rain in. Nuclear fusion, this isn't.

Thinking it's difficult to do shows a profound lack of realizing how simple it really is. As long as the missiles have someone's sensors to lead them in with LOS, they're guided. That's all it takes,no fancy mindnumbing calculations. Missiles go up, and as long as you can see the target, the guidance systems in the LRMs themselves do the rest.

Edited by wanderer, 05 August 2014 - 08:30 AM.

[Iskareot]

If they can balance NARCS in drops...

If they can also provide limits to boats in drops....

If they can then also limit the spam of them on a single target to an extent...


Then it would be fine. Or add crazy heat maybe.