637 replies to this topic

[The Boz]

Kjudoon, on 30 October 2014 - 07:44 PM, said:

So the damage nerf is happening. I don't know what a 0.1 reduction in damage will ultimately do, but I have little confidence the impact will be minor. I remember how much losing a miniscule amount of splash damage hurt LRMs too.

Loss of splash damage was a 25%+ damage reduction.

[Kjudoon]

The Boz, on 30 October 2014 - 11:37 PM, said:

Loss of splash damage was a 25%+ damage reduction.

Pretty much. But one thing I've learned is every nerf is more severe than expected once it goes into play. So I expect this could be much more severe than before.

You can build an energy centric mech and have great success and praise from the public.
You can do the same with balllistics and the oohs and ahhs from the competative crowd don't stop.

Do it with missiles and the screams of outrage from the same crowds are unending lit by the fires of a hundred torches and a few dozen pitchforks from the LRMhator minority.

[The Boz]

I don't think anyone was actually surprised by how much damage the splash added on.

Edited by The Boz, 31 October 2014 - 12:53 AM.

[Alex Warden Wolf]

well LRM just received a "soft" buff on some Mech variants... (up to 40% more range with certain quirks + modules)... i wouldn´t mind if they counter-nerfed those "stay at the base and rain hell" mechs a little ^^

[MischiefSC]

Weaken indirect fire, buff direct fire. Make IS LRMs faster than Clan LRMs to compensate for Clan LRMs better direct fire 'no minimum range' advantage.

Reduce impulse/flare. Again, make direct fire significantly faster and with a flatter trajectory.

The issue isn't LRMs - it's that they're pretty much just as effective with indirect fire as they are with direct fire, being able to shoot someone who is utterly unable to shoot back and with a weapon that will find you anywhere you go so long as anyone on the other team can see you, that's always been the issue.

I still say indirect fire should need narc/tag, or a command module (again, balancing buff for IS to offset Clan LRM advantages).

Do all that and you can have ECM just slow locks, not block them completely. Better all around.

The problem is and has always been indirect fires significant advantages making the weapon feast/famine. It's not that LRMs are useless at higher Elo levels - not at all. Just that someone at higher Elo can generally get more *consistent* success with direct fire weapons. For all the 'I never get killed by LRMs' stuff I see recognizable names from the top tier competitive players getting killed by LRMs in pug matches and even group matches when they're not in a 12man. The only time 'high Elo' people completely neg LRMs is when they're in a full team set to do so.

I don't care who you are; you drop in a team that isn't all 100% together and on-board and you end up on Canyon, Caustic, Alpine or to a lesser degree Terra Therma, Forest or Tourmaline, you're going to be at significant risk to LRMs.

I get that everyone wants to do the 'I'm more hardcore' bit. It's normal and natural on forums. If we're going to talk seriously about a weapon balance we need to be serious about it. In pug matches LRMs are terribly effective and great for KDR and, conversely, win/loss. On average they're a high reward, low risk weapon. They're not as consistently effective as direct fire for someone who's good with direct fire weapons; in the long run a Timber Wolf laservomit setup will perform better on average but for most people LRMs are a solid and effective way to do a lot of damage without risk of being shot in return. If the person is even moderately smart about LRMs and has TAG and some lasers on it they're going to find it a high KDR and W/L build.

That's only gotten more so with TAG being free money for folks. When they fix the 'TAG gives me damage bonuses when used with my UAC5s' we'll see profits drop and TAG representation drop, we'll see how the affects LRM proliferation if at all.

Edited by MischiefSC, 31 October 2014 - 01:18 AM.

[Alex Warden Wolf]

MischiefSC, on 31 October 2014 - 01:17 AM, said:

Weaken indirect fire, buff direct fire.

i´ve been saying this since OBT times... hated down or just been ignored... thanks for re-stating it

[MoonfireSpam]

Hmms I like that LRMS are good area denial weapons - run out into to the open, prepare to lose >30% armour in short order (most teams seem to have in the order of LRM 100 between them).

They work well with spotters (god damn TAG farm meta)

What I hate is when you end up in spots like Canyon where the Canyon walls don't actually do anything to protect you, or River City where the cover is not high enough in decent portions of the map.

Also hate the way indirect fire works right now, it's just too easy. Stand behind building and mash "fire" once a fight starts is just zzz gameplay.

12 v 12 makes it really easy for LURM boats to not get stranded (though the bad ones still manage this).

[Galenit]

Kjudoon, on 29 October 2014 - 06:01 PM, said:

The "Recliner" syndrome is something indicative of a BAD LRM pilot, not a good one.

I have heared this yesterday.

On crimson, after standing the whole match on the top hill, using 40 salvos of my c1, the whole fight only taking 3 times counterfire at me.
I am bad or the 10 enemys that let me fire salvo after salvo after salvo ignoring me.
I used mostly los, because of artemis and tag, but they still not fired at me.

People like this are the ones that want lrms nerfed.
Sure lrms have some problems, but moaning about a c1 with 30 tubes using los to be effective?



I still think the following would make lrms better:

ECM dont prevents locks, but it increases spread and lockontime by 50%
All lrms have the same spread-circle.
Using more launchers at on time increases the spread.

BAP counters the ecm effect.
Tag, Artemis, NARC reduces spread and lockontime.


What would this do:

Bigger launchers do more damage in the same circle as small launchers (hitting with 5 missiles in a 10m circle or 20 missiles in the same 10m circle)

Boating would be countered, if you you 2 lrm 5 they would hit with 10 missiles in a 15m circle, using 4 lrm 5s would hit with 20 missiles in a 25m circle. Using 2 lrm 20 would hit with 40 missiles in a 15m circle.

Indirect would be countered by the spread, if you use tag, the circle is reduced by 25%, artemis another 25%, and your single lrm 5 or 20 would hit at a 5m circle. 2 launchers would be hit at a 11,5m circle. Add artemis and tag and you go down to another 25% reduction of the spread, now you hit at 2,5m with a single launcher and at 7,5m with 2 launchers.
Hups, 50%, thats countering the 50% increase of the ecm spreadincrease too ...

Lockontime is countered by artemis too or is reduced to make them more effective as upgrade, if there is no ecm.

NARC removes the ecm effect of the target, normal spread and lockontime for it, as bap does it too.


Now we have lrms with a great spreading and even a bigger spreading of more launchers, if the enemy has ecm it goes even more up. 4 launchers at ecm gives you a 37,5m spreadcircle for your missiles if you not use artemis and tag and/or bap, narc.

We have artemis and tag to make lrms more then a sandblaster but you need los to use them to the full effect.
ECM helps at lrms, but gives you no jesusbox.
NARC, BAP counters ecm as they should.

Somewhere some weeks ago i had this in anotherthred with numbers that are not only examples, but i am too lazy to do it again or search it, it was about what to do to lrms but do not touch other systems ...
The numbers i used in this thread are only examples, it needs some balancing and testing the right startspreadcircle to make it good. But i thing the base circle should be around the biggest mech.

Edited by Galenit, 31 October 2014 - 05:25 AM.

[mad kat]

Lrms are a nightmare when the red team has a spotter, a tag and or narc mech and a couple of ecm mechs and a friendly Pug team that likes doing this:

Otherwise if you can counter all those things and can actually get close to their boats there's nothing more enjoyable than tearing apart LRM campers. The only problem with that is it takes the whole team a concerted effort to close in on LRM boats and most PUG games the team on the receiving end do just what the sheep above are doing.

Nerf the weapon all you want its the PUG mentality that's the problem not the weapon. And i hate being on the receiving end of LRM's

Edited by mad kat, 31 October 2014 - 05:30 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

It's the challenges that PGI has created that keeps missiles in an 'over active' status.

It's one of the only weapons where it's possible to hit EVERY enemy at least once without ever actually seeing the enemy.

So, you can rack up LOTS of assists for scoring in the challenges.

Plus with some build's capable of pouring out a near constant stream of missile fire, there's lots of opportunity for kill steals, further increasing your score for the challenges.

Your side happens to bring 3 or more missile boats and those boat pilots understand the concept of focusing fire, and well... It can be brutal.

At the end of this week, I saw missile usage return to 'normal', the low end ELO teams in the group queue were using them, and an occasional few in the pug queue, BUT, now that we have this trick or treat challenge...

You'll see yet another LRMageddon...

[KraftySOT]

mad kat, on 31 October 2014 - 05:29 AM, said:

This is every game in MWO.

Thats the issue with LRMs.

People say "well theyre not bad because you can avoid them."

Yeah but...avoiding them is a part of the problem too. Sitzkrieg is boring as ****.

[LordKnightFandragon]

Triordinant, on 30 October 2014 - 07:56 PM, said:

The ideal solution is to make LRMs effective for direct fire, but horribad when used for indirect fire, just like in the "real" Battletech universe.

Trollzy bad acc unless you have a NARC or TAG on, then it returns to current accuracy...without, its got hte spread of an SRM6 without art....

[Vaderman]

MischiefSC, on 31 October 2014 - 01:17 AM, said:

Weaken indirect fire, buff direct fire. Make IS LRMs faster than Clan LRMs to compensate for Clan LRMs better direct fire 'no minimum range' advantage.

Reduce impulse/flare. Again, make direct fire significantly faster and with a flatter trajectory.

The issue isn't LRMs - it's that they're pretty much just as effective with indirect fire as they are with direct fire, being able to shoot someone who is utterly unable to shoot back and with a weapon that will find you anywhere you go so long as anyone on the other team can see you, that's always been the issue.

I still say indirect fire should need narc/tag, or a command module (again, balancing buff for IS to offset Clan LRM advantages).

Do all that and you can have ECM just slow locks, not block them completely. Better all around.

The problem is and has always been indirect fires significant advantages making the weapon feast/famine. It's not that LRMs are useless at higher Elo levels - not at all. Just that someone at higher Elo can generally get more *consistent* success with direct fire weapons. For all the 'I never get killed by LRMs' stuff I see recognizable names from the top tier competitive players getting killed by LRMs in pug matches and even group matches when they're not in a 12man. The only time 'high Elo' people completely neg LRMs is when they're in a full team set to do so.

I don't care who you are; you drop in a team that isn't all 100% together and on-board and you end up on Canyon, Caustic, Alpine or to a lesser degree Terra Therma, Forest or Tourmaline, you're going to be at significant risk to LRMs.

I get that everyone wants to do the 'I'm more hardcore' bit. It's normal and natural on forums. If we're going to talk seriously about a weapon balance we need to be serious about it. In pug matches LRMs are terribly effective and great for KDR and, conversely, win/loss. On average they're a high reward, low risk weapon. They're not as consistently effective as direct fire for someone who's good with direct fire weapons; in the long run a Timber Wolf laservomit setup will perform better on average but for most people LRMs are a solid and effective way to do a lot of damage without risk of being shot in return. If the person is even moderately smart about LRMs and has TAG and some lasers on it they're going to find it a high KDR and W/L build.

That's only gotten more so with TAG being free money for folks. When they fix the 'TAG gives me damage bonuses when used with my UAC5s' we'll see profits drop and TAG representation drop, we'll see how the affects LRM proliferation if at all.

Exactly.

Indirect fire is way too effective, and the fact that you have a hard counter (ECM) to LRMs says a lot. You don't need hard counters to something that isn't potentially overwhelming.

I know the game isn't canon but there's a reason indirect fire in TT was much much less effective than it is in this game.

The problem is we're trying to use logic on people who (as previous posts have shown) have no interest in admitting the facts, and are downright feral in keeping the status quo regarding LRMs and making it sound like only a genius could use them.

Maybe it's because it's the only playstyle they're effective at, I don't know.

Whatever the reason, the potential to have an entire company of mechs firing on you without LOS is simply overwhelming and shouldn't be allowed.

Indirect fire is the problem and is what needs looked at.

Edited by Vaderman, 31 October 2014 - 07:17 AM.

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

At least one person had to be looking at or took the risk for a narc. And it is never the entire team. There are usually about 4-5mechs that have lurms in pugs. And maybe 2 in teams. That is it.

[Vaderman]

Bartholomew bartholomew, on 31 October 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:

At least one person had to be looking at or took the risk for a narc. And it is never the entire team. There are usually about 4-5mechs that have lurms in pugs. And maybe 2 in teams. That is it.

Don't get me wrong, I completely realize there are 2 different environments for lurms. Organized teams can do a pretty easy job of negating them.

Did you play during the tourny? The lurmage blotted out the sun. I know because I was often contributing. At some point combat will occur under 600m, when that happens those 4-5 mechs will strip even a daishi/dire whale to the bone in no time.

Like I said, it's due to indirect fire. Once any of your mechs has a target, regardless of orientation and most cover, indirect fire can be placed on a mech in an overwhelming fashion. This is why the balance issue is so hard, they're making changes to a weapon system that is basically a company weapon, not an individual mech weapon.

[Abisha]

again this?
problem is not LRM, it's the mechs each mech have damn freaking Launcher all add up to a total of 12 launchers or more per team

[LordKnightFandragon]

Lol, make the MM limit how many LRMs it puts per team....

limit it by size of the launchers...

Like each team can only have a total of 60 missiles...or 3 LRM20s....or any combination of it...

Then, ensure each team gets atleat 1 ECM mech......

[RalphVargr]

If you don't like LRM's, then remove all non-direct-fire weapons with a greater than 500 meter range from the game.

Fair is fair. Isn't that what you really want?

[Mavairo]

mad kat, on 31 October 2014 - 05:29 AM, said:

Lrms are a nightmare when the red team has a spotter, a tag and or narc mech and a couple of ecm mechs and a friendly Pug team that likes doing this:

Otherwise if you can counter all those things and can actually get close to their boats there's nothing more enjoyable than tearing apart LRM campers. The only problem with that is it takes the whole team a concerted effort to close in on LRM boats and most PUG games the team on the receiving end do just what the sheep above are doing.

Nerf the weapon all you want its the PUG mentality that's the problem not the weapon. And i hate being on the receiving end of LRM's

People being complete morons is not a reason to nerf LRMs.

If people want to cower, and then get picked off and die, the loss is on them for doing EXACTLY what the LRM team wants.

[NKAc Street]

Whether any one want to admit it or not, the idea of hiding in cover from lrms is a joke, PGI changes the lrm flight path and on most maps , there is very little cover. Say what you want, lrms are stupid.