606 replies to this topic

[Ebonkosh]

• give fewer rounds per ton
  
• increase time between firing the LRMs
  
• use a CPU module to control what and how many weapons a mech can carry. This applies to all weapons. CPU say with a certain power 30 power would not be able to run 4 LRM20s since lrm 20s are 20 power each. The mech would have to upgrade to a CPU40power module that weighs more tonnage. Same would go for other weapons. The more powerful the weapon the more powerful the CPU to guide it and fire it needs to be. Won't limit the flexibility of weapons just prevents to a degree the stacking of powerful weapons.
  
• Fix the MM to make sure both teams have ECM or not ECM.
  
• Limit strikes arty and air to one per 5 mins per team.

Thats where my nerf bat wold hit and go from there...

We want a game thats fun to play and getting killed walking to cover by LRMs is not fun for a new player.

Ebon

[Wolfways]

Greenjulius, on 18 August 2014 - 09:30 PM, said:

LRMs feel like a mess at the moment. If someone gets hit by narc and doesn't have close cover, they will either die or suffer critical damage. Or lose their arms/torsos. I think either the launchers should weigh a little more, or every ton has less missles. LRM boats shouldn't be invalidated, but there should be some discouragement for just boating 1500-2000 missles. Either way, it's making the game frustrating for new players who don't play to the "always behind cover and ECM" dogma. Almost every friend I introduce to the game stops playing because of LRM spam.

SRMs on the other hand are just about perfect. Splat mechs are back and fun to play. I haven't bothered with SSRM's since they got damage nerfed. They aren't accurate enough to be useful against much more than lights.

Most other direct fire weapons, including PPCs, are quite close to being balanced finally.

You can't change the weight of equipment as it would invalidate stock mechs (which are pretty bad to use in MWO but PGI sells them anyway).

As for ammo, mechs with ammo-based weapons are already carrying far more tonnage in ammo than they should be. A stock CPLT-C1 comes with 2tons of LRM ammo because that's enough for a TT game. There's is no way that is enough in MWO where matches are at least three times longer and imo all ammo/ton should be tripled.
In TT discouragement for carrying lots of ammo was explosion chance due to heat, but in MWO it rarely happens because PGI left out the heat scale.

[IraqiWalker]

Greenjulius, on 18 August 2014 - 09:30 PM, said:

LRMs feel like a mess at the moment. If someone gets hit by narc and doesn't have close cover, they will either die or suffer critical damage. Or lose their arms/torsos. I think either the launchers should weigh a little more, or every ton has less missles. LRM boats shouldn't be invalidated, but there should be some discouragement for just boating 1500-2000 missles. Either way, it's making the game frustrating for new players who don't play to the "always behind cover and ECM" dogma. Almost every friend I introduce to the game stops playing because of LRM spam.

SRMs on the other hand are just about perfect. Splat mechs are back and fun to play. I haven't bothered with SSRM's since they got damage nerfed. They aren't accurate enough to be useful against much more than lights.

Most other direct fire weapons, including PPCs, are quite close to being balanced finally.

You do know we're using double armor, and double internal health on all of our mechs right? LRMs are supposed to be very effective. It's why they are the most famous boat in the history of the game since the first cardboard catapult ever set foot on a table.

[Johnny Reb]

Ask any top player on the tourney, and lrms were not involved. Nuff said!

[Kjudoon]

I've had more than a few matches when I've gotten narced away from cover and taken up to 20-30 seconds of bombardment before getting to cover and survived it. Of course I was in a Battlemaster and was stripped bare after that so I was constantly watching my back, front and sides the rest of the match... but I survived, AND got my revenge on the little NARCer who got me... twice. That said, LRMs are a mess. You're feast or famine, no in between.

[IraqiWalker]

Kjudoon, on 18 August 2014 - 09:52 PM, said:

LRMs are a mess. You're feast or famine, no in between.

Yeah, and that's mainly because unlike other weapons, they rely almost completely (70%) on the skill of the target, not the user.

[Kjudoon]

That's actually a very interesting way to look at it. I wouldn't put it quite so high, more like 50/50, but it does rely a LOT on your opponent having made wrong choices. It then relies on you making as many right choices.

[Wolfways]

All i know is it's very hard to use LRM's on my opponents (solo PUG matches) and it's rare for me to take much damage from LRM's.
I have noticed that with the lighter clan launchers more mechs are fitting them and I'm getting hit a little more, which is nice
I might even consider using AMS sometime...if i ever decide to stop only piloting stock mechs

[Johnny Reb]

With the Kit alot more ecm running around.

[DivineEvil]

I think LRMs are as close to being balanced as they ever were. Despite that I think they encourage an entrenched game-play too much. Just personally I would love to see some changes made to them in mechanics perspective, rather than nerfing any common weapon stats mentioned ealier.

First of all, I'd love to see their trajectories to be more dependant on user's position, so that they would require more forward space in order to lauch from within cover. Also, it would help if relative position of a user and a target had an effect on the falling angle, so that being in inferior altitude would make them hit the target almost horizontally, while being on a higher ground would make them hit from a steep height.

If that's not enough, I'd expect a tonnage of a target to affect lock-on duration to make sense, so that Medium and Light mechs wouldn't be as a preferable target for them as they're now due to low armor rating. Way too often I find myself trying to play my role as ninja-light hunting clumsy assaults, or as brawler Medium performing flanking attacks only to get blown by the couple of LRM volleys from random location on the map, at which point I can just as well leave the game immediately.

[IraqiWalker]

DivineEvil, on 19 August 2014 - 12:17 AM, said:

I think LRMs are as close to being balanced as they ever were. Despite that I think they encourage an entrenched game-play too much. Just personally I would love to see some changes made to them in mechanics perspective, rather than nerfing any common weapon stats mentioned ealier.

First of all, I'd love to see their trajectories to be more dependant on user's position, so that they would require more forward space in order to lauch from within cover. Also, it would help if relative position of a user and a target had an effect on the falling angle, so that being in inferior altitude would make them hit the target almost horizontally, while being on a higher ground would make them hit from a steep height.

If that's not enough, I'd expect a tonnage of a target to affect lock-on duration to make sense, so that Medium and Light mechs wouldn't be as a preferable target for them as they're now due to low armor rating. Way too often I find myself trying to play my role as ninja-light hunting clumsy assaults, or as brawler Medium performing flanking attacks only to get blown by the couple of LRM volleys from random location on the map, at which point I can just as well leave the game immediately.

LRMs have different trajectories at different distances actually.

[Wolfways]

DivineEvil, on 19 August 2014 - 12:17 AM, said:

If that's not enough, I'd expect a tonnage of a target to affect lock-on duration to make sense, so that Medium and Light mechs wouldn't be as a preferable target for them as they're now due to low armor rating. Way too often I find myself trying to play my role as ninja-light hunting clumsy assaults, or as brawler Medium performing flanking attacks only to get blown by the couple of LRM volleys from random location on the map, at which point I can just as well leave the game immediately.

Current LRM target priority: Assault>Heavy>Medium>Light. The faster the mech the easier it can avoid missiles.

[Voidcrafter]

Wolfways, on 19 August 2014 - 01:21 AM, said:

Current LRM target priority: Assault>Heavy>Medium>Light. The faster the mech the easier it can avoid missiles.

My LRM target priority:
LRM boats > DWFs > what you said.

[Heeden]

Wolfways, on 16 August 2014 - 09:05 PM, said:

Indirect:
Indirect only on TAG, NARC, UAV. Bigger spread AOE, high arc.

General:
Increase speed to 300ms, increase cooldown of all launchers by 30%, increase missile damage by 30% (reduces spam but keeps the same dps and makes them more viable for direct-fire), reduce impulse shake/blur, remove incoming missile warning to make LRM's actually viable at long range, lower arc for direct-fire.

I'd say the +damage or +speed or lose the lock-on ability with direct fire. If direct fire has a lower arc, or flies in a straight line, that would have the same effect as a speed increase anyway. Removing the missile-lock warning might not be necessary for direct-fire as the missiles getting there quick enough would negate most of its advantage.

[ShinVector]

Wolfways, on 18 August 2014 - 08:28 PM, said:

Does playing in the solo queue mean you play worse? I only play in solo PUGs and don't get hit by LRM's very often, so it's not solo queue...unless you mean low ELO.

Haven't been playing much.. Didn't get used to the change tactics being deploy.. Eg. Lots of UAV and that Champion Kintaro.
Anyway.. Not sure what you are trying to imply.. You would notice my name appearing in the Leader Board last few tournies right ? Can't fake that...

[Wolfways]

Heeden, on 19 August 2014 - 06:22 AM, said:

I'd say the +damage or +speed or lose the lock-on ability with direct fire. If direct fire has a lower arc, or flies in a straight line, that would have the same effect as a speed increase anyway. Removing the missile-lock warning might not be necessary for direct-fire as the missiles getting there quick enough would negate most of its advantage.

The +damage is to compensate for the increased cooldown, keeping the dps the same.
If you remove the lockon ability LRM's will be even less of a long range weapon than they currently are, unless you increased missile speed to around 1000ms, which i doubt anyone wants for some reason
The incoming missile warning is the one thing (other than tons of cover) that stops LRM's being long range. Without the warning players would know they are being fired at when the first salvo hits, just like other, more powerful weapons.

[Wolfways]

ShinVector, on 19 August 2014 - 07:24 AM, said:

Haven't been playing much.. Didn't get used to the change tactics being deploy.. Eg. Lots of UAV and that Champion Kintaro.
Anyway.. Not sure what you are trying to imply.. You would notice my name appearing in the Leader Board last few tournies right ? Can't fake that...

Sorry i wasn't clear.
I mean do you feel that you play worse in the solo queue? I was wondering if you feel that you yourself perform better when you have a group.
I also found it strange that you said "The battlefield favours LRM spamming more for solo". I only play solo and feel that LRM's are second only to the flamer as most pointless weapon system.

I don't take much notice of tournies tbh. The ones i watched on NGNG YouTube were mind-numbingly boring and i thought the players were bad. I've also seen i high level player say that he tried LRM's against his normal groups and did well with them, although i suspect that may be because those players just aren't used to LRM's so might get a bit careless.
But i don't know though. I've been actively avoiding getting my ELO high by playing stock-ish mechs

[A banana in the tailpipe]

Wolfways, on 18 August 2014 - 08:28 PM, said:

Does playing in the solo queue mean you play worse? I only play in solo PUGs and don't get hit by LRM's very often, so it's not solo queue...unless you mean low ELO.

You call hiding in a corner of the map on your kitfox "playing"? Granted when things go sour because of bad pugs I fully understand but just couldn't resist. It was like "pulling wings off a fly"

[Wolfways]

lockwoodx, on 19 August 2014 - 08:44 AM, said:

You call hiding in a corner of the map on your kitfox "playing"? Granted when things go sour because of bad pugs I fully understand but just couldn't resist. It was like "pulling wings off a fly"

Hide? I never hide.

Not sure what the "pulling wings off a fly" means...

Edited by Wolfways, 19 August 2014 - 08:56 AM.

[girl on fire]

"hey will never develop the dexterity to use direct fire weapons."

lolol... yes because it requires an intense amount of dexterity (not sure dexterity is even the right word) to click the buttons that fire weapons that are virtually instantaneously travelling to the target. Which isn't to say LRM's don't require less skill to use but let's not lose sight of the fact that there aren't any hard to use weapons in this game... except maybe the flamers, which are more just plain useless than difficult.

Edited by girl on fire, 19 August 2014 - 10:15 AM.