637 replies to this topic

[Mercules]

Silicon Life, on 28 October 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

Indirect fire with LRM's shouldn't work unless mechs have C3 master/slave or tag/narc is used on the target. ECM should decrease target range like it did in MW4. LRM minimum range should be scrapped for just being really inaccurate at short ranges (only able to hit stationary targets). Getting slammed by LRMs from 12 mechs and dying instantly is not fun. Having a weapon that does nothing in certain scenarios is not fun either.

LRMs should work differently, but 3 versions of MW getting them wrong cemented how they function in MWO. You should be able to indirect fire them from any spotter, but they should be a bit wider spread, not track, and be faster. They should work a lot better than they do in direct fire.

Nicholas Carlyle, on 28 October 2014 - 11:50 AM, said:

That's because they are bad players who prey on other bad players.

But hey, lets balance the game around derps, that should make for engaging gameplay.

Exactly, in most group games I don't have to worry about LRMs if I do see them they are in the furball. In PuGs though I often see them because there are so many targets that don't know how to deal with them. At that point I hop in my Commando and hunt them.

Burktross, on 28 October 2014 - 11:53 AM, said:

What type of kills? Direct fire or indirect fire?

SRMs and MLs. See the answer to LRM boaters who think they can stand in one place and puke ordinance is a fast light. If they stick with their team that is one thing, but a large chunk of them will stand behind their team unprotected. Like the Stalker I stripped all the back armor off then chased up the ramp in Crimson... right into the waiting arms of my team.

[Mystere]

MoonUnitBeta, on 27 October 2014 - 11:11 PM, said:

I think we should just remove tag and narc.

Kjudoon, on 27 October 2014 - 11:21 PM, said:

I think we should remove ECM and AMS.

I think people should just L2P and stop pestering PGI again into changing LRMs again by massively whining again.

[Mercules]

Mystere, on 28 October 2014 - 12:36 PM, said:

I think people should just L2P and stop pestering PGI again into changing LRMs again by massively whining again.

I think you are correct.

[Lightfoot]

Why Run, on 28 October 2014 - 09:34 AM, said:

How bad do you have to be to get hit by LRMs these days? ECM + Rader Derp + LRM locking bug which they clearly don't care to fix (laughable). Another round of nerfing **** into the ground. Whats the point of playing this game, gravitating toward the most boring vanilla arcade shooter ever.

QFT

So true. PGI needs to embrace the full scope of Battle Tech and let 'Skill' sort out the balance.

LRMs are so dominating, even though they are so weak you never get a Kill credit, because PGI has removed Gauss Rifles and PPCs from the standard player's long range kit. Gauss Rifles and PPCs are anti-LRM tools. Anti-poptart tools too, even though the poptarts use them. Also poptarts are weak at long range, but over-powering at brawl range, so all this long-range nerfage just feeds them what they want, fat targets that can't bring their weapons to bear. All PGI's saving with nerfs is really killing us faster.

Look at the Gauss Rifle. It's the weakest DPS/ton ballistic in Battle Tech. It's advantage is it is accurate, so it should be balanced by giving it a 6 second recharge (no de-sync). Then everyone could use it, but it would not compete with AC20's at close range.

Normally the Map dictates how successful each weapon is and the players bring those weapons, simple. MWO doesn't tell you this so you take your chances, but it's best to mix long and short range so you don't get overwhelmed. Still MWO has so many maze-like maps where LRMs are junk that I find the idea of a new LRM nerf inexplicable.

I warned you that almost all the Clan mechs would carry some LRMs and that Inner Sphere would need to counter with PPCs and Gauss Rifles since I.S. LRMs weigh twice as much. Now you are feeling it, but LRMs are such weak weapons a nerf would force players to boat them completely or abandon them. However, true Battle Tech Gauss Rifles will save the newbs from the weak LRMs. You have my word.



.

Edited by Lightfoot, 28 October 2014 - 01:20 PM.

[Mystere]

Kitty Bacon, on 28 October 2014 - 10:01 AM, said:

... Buff AMS and give rewards for running it.

AlphaToaster, on 28 October 2014 - 10:10 AM, said:

Offer rewards for AMS usage ..

Greenjulius, on 28 October 2014 - 10:24 AM, said:

Rewards/Boosts for AMS are needed.

Are these people ******* serious?

They want to be rewarded for equipping a counter to a weapon that is constantly killing them and thus causing them to go to the forums and cry incessantly to PGI?

OMFG! OMFG! OMFG!

[DasSibby]

Even the Devs are recognizing the problem now!

Yes.... Yesss! And for those who says LRMs are fine?

[Col Jaime Wolf]

lurms are actually weak and a poor weapon. often lrms will not "lock" even tho you clearly locked onto a target and just fire at the ground or fail to track their target. ive taken to chain firing lrms 24/7 because of how bad it is and how much of waste it is to try and hit someone with a 40+ salvo only to have it fail to track and just hit the ground.

cant tell you how much of the cover in maps can really #$#$ a lrm boat off. tourmaline is a good example those ridges can be a real ##$# to arc missles into a target.

lrms already have alot of heat and long cooldowns and in any LOS direct fire situation they are a liability and have almost 0% tactical value compared to AC/Gauss.

lrm boats are super weak to any mech that is fast+JJ as they will easily outmaneuver you and scrap your mech for no charge.

lrms need buffs not nerfs honestly the tracking can be freaking horrible and even with the best positioning you have to boat a metric #$##$ ton of lrms to break through AMS or to even begin approaching the damage potential of ballistic mechs.

if i can get an Anti Ballistic System (ABS harhar) then nerf lurms all you want but as it stands its the only weapon that
1 requires TW to even work right
2 is mitigated by AMS/ECM, slow lockons, non-existent shadow locking (lock but missles dont track) and radar dep
3 pales in comparison to every other weapon even energy weapons
4 requires obscene amounts of launchers and ammo to be effective
5 aforementioned requirements leave your mech very one-sided and very polar performance wise
6 you have to put up with people calling you names like "noob get a real mech", or "ya ya no skill lrms noobs win again what a shocker", or our time honored favorite "we we we..... didnt get any ECM so its UNFAIR and UNBALANCED you you.... LRM NOOBS.... MM screwed us cuz ya no ECM....." (forget to bring that AMS did you?)
7 really when the #$$# was the last time you got called a noob for boating AC's? even tho its widely recognized as the best weapons class
8 people are hypocrites and want "point and click adventures"

im not in favor of removing any weapon, or nerfing any weapon so that it becomes either niche or downright bad. but LRMS are barely usable and swing from really freaking good to totally useless which is EXACTLY what needs to be fixed.

Edited by Mellifluer, 28 October 2014 - 01:01 PM.

[TheLuc]

LRMs are annoying on the recieving end, but i think its just due to screen shake and the explosion blinding that makes them such a hot topic. Otherwise i think they are ok

[Metus regem]

TheLuc, on 28 October 2014 - 12:58 PM, said:

LRMs are annoying on the recieving end, but i think its just due to screen shake and the explosion blinding that makes them such a hot topic. Otherwise i think they are ok

I actually can't remember the last time I died to LRM's... and I am hardly what I'd call good at MWO.....

I find with cLRM's is that they have a higher skill cap than one thinks they do, and they require a little bit of skill to use in an effective manor.

[RustyBolts]

rageagainstthedyingofthelight, on 28 October 2014 - 09:04 AM, said:

Every map has cover from LRM's, even caustic.

People are two busy playing ring-around-the-rosey on the cauldron to utilize the huge city area's with plenty of cover once they realize the other team has more LRMs.


You can avoid LRM's on Alpine too, you just choose not to, because you use the same routes you always use.

He who speaks the truth.

[Kirkland Langue]

Mystere, on 28 October 2014 - 12:50 PM, said:

Are these people ******* serious?

They want to be rewarded for equipping a counter to a weapon that is constantly killing them and thus causing them to go to the forums and cry incessantly to PGI?

OMFG! OMFG! OMFG!

You should calm down and think it through - the point of rewarding AMS wouldn't be to convince you to get it to save yourself - the point would be to get it to save others. Maybe a reward for when LRM targets someone else but is intercepted by your AMS. It's not a horrible idea to get more people to get AMS for the purpose of helping their team out.

BUT - I still think the best answer is to get rid of the Shake, Rattle, and Explode effects. And then "fix" ECM.

[STEF_]

Russ and devs like to brawl, and I hope they would not subdue the game to their own taste.

MWO should be a BT based game, even more than now.
About LRM, please PGI, just adjust indirect fire,
I hope that Russ and co, would not start nerfing, or upset the game departing it from BT

[Vandul]

[RazorbeastFXK3]

The SRMs still deal 2 damage per missile while the Streak SRM deal 2.5 damage per missile. The LRMs would get reduced from 1.1 to just 1 damage per missile.

Barantor, on 28 October 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

If you do that, I would want the direct fire lrms buffed. Face tanking to keep lock and slow fire arcing LRMs are a death sentence to anyone taking fire when direct firing. Make the travel time faster and it isn't as good as an AC, but not a death sentence.

[Pygar]

Kirkland Langue, on 28 October 2014 - 01:11 PM, said:

You should calm down and think it through - the point of rewarding AMS wouldn't be to convince you to get it to save yourself - the point would be to get it to save others. Maybe a reward for when LRM targets someone else but is intercepted by your AMS. It's not a horrible idea to get more people to get AMS for the purpose of helping their team out.

BUT - I still think the best answer is to get rid of the Shake, Rattle, and Explode effects. And then "fix" ECM.

Or PGI could do nothing about this "issue" because LRMs are still all but worthless in competitive 12 man games. Sure, lots of people dragged them out after the first few hours of the weekend "solo" tourney....because if everybody is going to forgo playing as a team to meander around trying to snipe and everybody has spotter gear equipped to milk some extra victory rewards, then yeah, LRMs are ok enough to farm Cbills/XP with....but after the tournament I bet they will disappear again.

[Reported for Inappropriate Name]

this definitely sounds par for the course. developers have a habit of nerfing things into the ground when they're killed or otherwise harassed by it.

remember when we had knockdown? thanks goons.

[RazorbeastFXK3]

Infectious laughter is infectious.

And I do believe that LRMs are fine but probably would involve a bit more strategy if the LRM range was brought down from 1,000M down to 800M or even 630M with their damage reduced from 1.1 down to 1 and the NARC's range increased to 1,000M.

And maybe even increase the SRM range from 270M to 360M with SSRM to 480M instead of having all Inner Sphere SRM/SSRM at 270M.

DasSibby, on 28 October 2014 - 12:53 PM, said:

Even the Devs are recognizing the problem now!

Yes.... Yesss! And for those who says LRMs are fine?

[Kirkland Langue]

Pygar, on 28 October 2014 - 01:47 PM, said:

Or PGI could do nothing about this "issue" because LRMs are still all but worthless in competitive 12 man games. Sure, lots of people dragged them out after the first few hours of the weekend "solo" tourney....because if everybody is going to forgo playing as a team to meander around trying to snipe and everybody has spotter gear equipped to milk some extra victory rewards, then yeah, LRMs are ok enough to farm Cbills/XP with....but after the tournament I bet they will disappear again.

I can say with 100% certainty that PGI would be ill advised to listen to your recommendation to do nothing about LRMs.

LRMs aren't an effective weapon for getting kills, which is what you want for a competitive team. LRMs are little more than a griefing tool to use against new players - meanwhile your own team of new players think you did great because you got so many assists and so much damage.

It's the ultimate griefing tool - and PGI makes it worse because of all the incentives to play LRMs or to support them.

LRMs could do ZERO damage and they would still be broken. In fact, PGI could lower LRM damage to zero and I bet you still see a number of people who not only run them, but will argue that they help the team because the shake and blinding is enough to lead players to play badly under fire.

I would be perfectly fine with LRMs actually doing more damage - as long as they get rid of the Shake, Blur, and Blinding effects.

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

Lyoto Machida, on 28 October 2014 - 11:52 AM, said:

20% is a terrible LRM %, if we're talking using them for damage.

I'd say the top LRM guys are over 40% accuracy.

LRM5 at 36.7 but here is something funny, I have no stats for regular lrm20's. I wonder why...

[Willard Phule]

Any weapon that has ever made a kill shot should have it's damage reduced by 50%, it's rate of fire increased by 30 seconds and heat increased by 20 with a Ghost Heat multiplier of 10.

Problem solved.

Welcome to PillowWarrior:Online.