63 replies to this topic

[Ph30nix]

Not saying LRM's are OP or anything, but in the right situation they are a death sentence to their target.

Dont know about anyone else but im kinda tired of being behind cover, not in the open at all, but all of a sudden have a UAV pop up, or a spotter and next thign i know i have about 100+lrm's raining down on me non stop and there is nothing i can do about it.

It is past time to remove the linked target lock ability we currently have, let people target from an allys info but do not allow missle locks. With all the clan mechs running around there are almost always a few mechs carrying lrms in a match. Sometimes ALOT of mechs are carrying LRM's.

Before someone says L2P or use cover, realize the only perfect cover from LRM's is when you have a roof over your head. Any other cover there is almost always an angle that a launcher can hit you from. Yes some angles are obvious but sometimes all it takes is a few degrees to the side.

Require special equipment to achieve locks from allys targets if you want but the system of not requiring anything has got to go.

[Ph30nix]

yea you went into way more detail lol,

[Zyllos]

Ph30nix, on 27 August 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

yea you went into way more detail lol,

Because making changes to LRMs won't deal with the whole problem.

The entire sensor, EW, and LRM issue is all interconnected, thus need to be solved all at the same time with all details in mind at the same time.

[Ph30nix]

Zyllos, on 27 August 2014 - 11:53 AM, said:

Because making changes to LRMs won't deal with the whole problem.

The entire sensor, EW, and LRM issue is all interconnected, thus need to be solved all at the same time with all details in mind at the same time.

should have left at least the link post there,

and PGI would do anything in stages anyways, i think good part one would be removed linked locks at least.

[Lyoto Machida]

Get rid of the locked links ASAP...would help role warfare dramatically. Or at least no indirect LRM fire without NARC/TAG/UAV.

If PGI does something about this, it will probably in 2017 or 2018 (after CW Phase 11: Decals).

[wolf74]

Err No,that is current spoting system and in Line with CBT. Be happy they have not given the I.S. Pilot access to the C3 system yet.


C3 Master/Slave Data Links

C3 Master
5 Tons / 5 Criticals

C3 Slave
1 Ton / 1 Critical

A C3 Master Can have up too three Slaves or other Masters Linked to it. The C3 System lets ALL Targets data be shared Between Mechs in a C3 Network. AKA you would not have target anyone and all the Red Empty Triangles that you see ALL the other mech in your Network would see them too.

To get all 12 mechs in a Shared Network would take 4 Master system and 9 Slaves so 29tons and Critical total used.
Master "A" Slave connections (Master "B", "C", & "D")
Master "B" Slave connections (Slave "1","2", &"3")
Master "C" Slave connections (Slave "4","5", &"6")
Master "D" Slave connections (Slave "7","8", & "9")

Master A&B are Alpha Lance Lead
Master C is Bravo Lance Lead
Master D is Charli Lance Lead
the slave are the other mechs in the Lance.

Edited by wolf74, 27 August 2014 - 12:23 PM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ph30nix, on 27 August 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

Not saying LRM's are OP or anything, but in the right situation they are a death sentence to their target.

I had to stop here. In the right situation any Mass fired weapon is a death sentence. Be it Gauss, ACs, lasers et al. As it should be when the stars align just so.

[Escef]

Ph30nix, on 27 August 2014 - 11:39 AM, said:

Dont know about anyone else but im kinda tired of being behind cover, not in the open at all, but all of a sudden have a UAV pop up, or a spotter and next thign i know i have about 100+lrm's raining down on me non stop and there is nothing i can do about it.

If you were behind proper cover those LRMs wouldn't be hitting you. Also, take note of where the LRMs are coming from (the red flashes on the sides/top/bottom of your HUD indicate this), you may have cover from part of the enemy force, but are wide open to LRMs from every other angle. I know this is going to sound crazy, but people that know how to use LRMs don't just camp behind their main force, many can and will flank to get an angle on you.

[Biggest Salami]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 August 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

I had to stop here. In the right situation any Mass fired weapon is a death sentence. Be it Gauss, ACs, lasers et al. As it should be when the stars align just so.

MTE. Sadly, when situations aren't ideal or you make a mistake, it will be a death sentence in a match. That's kind of how it works; someone has to be the loser and die, and while it sucks when it's you, it's just part of the game.

[Joseph Mallan]

Biggest Salami, on 27 August 2014 - 12:29 PM, said:

MTE. Sadly, when situations aren't ideal or you make a mistake, it will be a death sentence in a match. That's kind of how it works; someone has to be the loser and die, and while it sucks when it's you, it's just part of the game.

Indeed it is, and it is a situation I have never complained about. I am playing a combat game against Active players, The good players win the bad players die... I die often!

[Escef]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 August 2014 - 12:31 PM, said:

Indeed it is, and it is a situation I have never complained about. I am playing a combat game against Active players, The good players win the bad players die... I die often!

He who accepts blame for his defeats has taken the first step towards improvement. He that blames others for his failures can never learn.

[Duke Nedo]

Sounds cool, but in practice that will probably make pugs much much worse... if there's only one target to shoot, everyone will focus fire without even knowing....

[Bishop Steiner]

Joseph Mallan, on 27 August 2014 - 12:23 PM, said:

I had to stop here. In the right situation any Mass fired weapon is a death sentence. Be it Gauss, ACs, lasers et al. As it should be when the stars align just so.

True. But whilst I am no "LRMS OP QQ!!!" poster, massed Gauss, etc all require Line of Sight. I think Phoenix may have a point about the interconnected targeting (aka C3 from Battletech?) Without Narc or TAG, one should be able to do indirect fire, but with MUCH reduced efficacy and accuracy.

[Livewyr]

I will add you to our ranks. (Those that want to make a real role warfare, including information warfare.)

Sadly, we are still oppressed by PGI.

[Star Colonel Silver Surat]

Beyond the current LRM spam issue, what I object to most about the MWO targetting system, and this has been the case since the start of this game, is the fact it can almost instantly read an enemy's complete weapon loadout and share that with all allies. Down to the fact that some weapons have been knocked out or jammed in the case of UACs.

What, does your MWO radar have x-ray God vision that can instantly differentiate between medium laser and small laser lenses, on top of the free C3 network?

In a realistic battlefield situation you shouldn't be able to tell 1) what the enemy is packing, beyond general visual indicators like gun barrels and missile racks 2) what the exact health of his components are beyond say destroyed limbs.

Imagine the unpredictability this would introduce if you can't instantly tell whether that stalker coming toward you is an LRM or SRM boat. Or whether it has fresh armor or is almost totally stripped of weapons. A lot of surprise and fun would result, as well as more dynamic battles.

.

Edited by Star Colonel Silver Surat, 27 August 2014 - 12:54 PM.

[topgun505]

@Wolf

You are correct in regards to referring to how sensors work in TT.

However.

How the LRMs themselves operate, do not.

Example.

Any volley that hits first checks to see how many missiles of the volley actually hit. On average only about half of the volley actually ever finds the target.

From there you break the remaining missiles that hit into 5-point clusters which them roll on the full body location and apply damage in 5-point clusters.

We most certainly do NOT have that in MWO. Pretty much every missile from every rack will hit, every time. It's basically an all or nothing thing. Either the target managed to scramble to cover in time and none hit, or they all found their mark. And darn near all of them land in the same body location (or, at most, spreads across one adjacent section).

If LRMs worked like that in TT they'd be a terror.

LRM spread needs increased and they need to target mech bones similar to steaks.

And yes, indirect needs to require TAG/NARC/UAV.

Edited by topgun505, 27 August 2014 - 12:51 PM.

[Quick n Fast]

imo if "anything" has LoS on you then yes one should b able to get locks on it...

like common guys... the games set a 1000yrs in the future... ur logic for this is still in the 21th century...

think about it... if you werent able to do this... it would be like technology a 1000yrs in the future never really advanced passed 2014.. lol

[Warblood]

Quote

it would be like technology a 1000yrs in the future never really advanced passed 2014.. lol

lmao
I think some people may like that.

[stjobe]

LRMs could be indirectly fired without C3, without Narc, without TAG:


(Total Warfare, p. 111)

And as for C3, we have free C3 and more in MWO already.

[Impyrium]

I'm with ph30nix here, though honestly I'd be perfectly happy with a significant reduction to camera shake. For me, that's the death sentence. A Kintaro champion, for example, will ruin my day. Granted I can be behind cover, but here you're talking a constant stream of LRM 5s, and if I'm not using AMS that can be very, very bad if you're caught doing that magical thing called 'pushing'.

I hope you guys screaming 'cover' do realise that contradicts what people keep preaching about pushing and not hiding.