637 replies to this topic

[Xiomburg]

I am just waiting for my anti-ballistics/laser module or equipment to be put into the game. Fair is fair.

[The Boz]

TB Xiomburg, on 29 October 2014 - 05:39 AM, said:

I am just waiting for my anti-ballistics/laser module or equipment to be put into the game. Fair is fair.

Also, keep waiting for the launchable aerial drone that shoots lasers and guns at targets outside direct visual range.

[Kilo 40]

The Boz, on 29 October 2014 - 05:42 AM, said:

Also, keep waiting for the launchable aerial drone that shoots lasers and guns at targets outside direct visual range.

does that come with the Anti Laser System? or the EMP module that completely negates all energy weapons?

[buckX]

TB Xiomburg, on 29 October 2014 - 05:39 AM, said:

I am just waiting for my anti-ballistics/laser module or equipment to be put into the game. Fair is fair.

You'll have to wait. Reflective armor (-50% energy damage) comes out in 3058. Then you'll have balance...until reactive armor comes out in 3063.

[Joseph Mallan]

So if a nerf is incoming, is it a 'Sine' of the times?

Edited by Joseph Mallan, 29 October 2014 - 06:30 AM.

[LordKnightFandragon]

buckX, on 29 October 2014 - 06:13 AM, said:

You'll have to wait. Reflective armor (-50% energy damage) comes out in 3058. Then you'll have balance...until reactive armor comes out in 3063.

Soooo, its 2014 and we've had reactive armor for awhile, and yet it doesnt come out in Battletech till 3063? Those succession wwars and stuff musta really blown the IS back into the stoneage...

[Dahhak]

The only time i used lrms was when i had to lvl one variant of the kitfox.The outcome was to funny,7 kills and a dmg of 850+ on a bloody missile boat kitfox.

So ye let them BURN.

[Kjudoon]

The Boz, on 29 October 2014 - 05:42 AM, said:

Also, keep waiting for the launchable aerial drone that shoots lasers and guns at targets outside direct visual range.

Honor Harrington series uses nuclear bomb pumped Xray laser warheads on missiles. Have fun.

[Almond Brown]

Brody319, on 28 October 2014 - 11:03 AM, said:

I do support my team when I can. However a lot of players don't bring AMS or ECM if they can. Most mechs actually adapted to the narc and tag rewards by swapping out a single energy weapon for tag, or a missile for narc. Meaning LRMs suddenly have a ton more support because people want more c-bills.

Not so much that rewards coax people into assisting their team, more just it encourages them to bring equipment to the battle they probably should be now.

Save some space for more ammo or weapons or equip AMS for arguably nothing.

Not paying for doing some jobs is basically like saying don't do that job. If it wasnt for the usefulness of the magical jesus box you would probably see it stripped away.

Sorry but something is amiss here. You say save space for more ammo, but, Narc is 2t (+1t ammo), with Tag adding another (1t, +lose a energy slot).

Yet carrying AMS is a mere 1.5t (with 1t ammo) and has the ability to keep you alive longer, thus getting you more chances to deal damage (extra energy slot), get more assists, and maybe even get some of the various Kill bonuses.

So can anyone actually confirm, with any real certainty, that carrying less weapons and taking up more pod space for Narc and/or Tag is actually that much more profitable, in the LONG run, to having LRM protection?

[Almond Brown]

Nicholas Carlyle, on 28 October 2014 - 11:46 AM, said:

Wait wait...so AMS doesn't do anything...but if you add a reward people will mount it?

That doesn't make sense.

Here is how it is. AMS in small amounts is a soft counter to LRMs, AMS in mass quantity is basically a hard counter to LRMs.

People CHOOSE not to take AMS. There are a few reasons, one is there are a lot of us who realize how bad LRMs are and basically don't die to them unless we make a stupid mistake. Which we then learn from. I died to LRMs like once every 2-3 months when I played regularly.

Then there are the derps who don't take AMS, these derps don't take it to add that extra DHS or some Ammo, but they are so derpy that they can't deal with LRMs. So they die and come whine on the forums.

Considering the HUGE amount of derps in this game, if all of them mounted AMS, there would probably be 6-10 AMS per team per game, thus negating LRMs.

But no, they are derps, kind of like you. Adding rewards might drive them to mount AMS, but that doesn't change any of the actual mechanics in the game.

Read a nice and polite thank you to some DERPS (as you put it) from a DireWolf pilot after those same DERPS came to save his sorry AMSless ass from a rain of Death he would have gotten... They knew his worth to the Team and it was rewarded with a W.

Not carrying AMS's may make some think they are some sort of hero (in their own minds surely) when missile don't get to them "much", but not carrying a Team based defensive weapon, when missile are known to be plentiful, is just being a selfish DERP of another kind really.

So DERP on DERP'rs. They sure as hell can't do it without you...

[Kavoh]

Joseph Mallan, on 28 October 2014 - 05:07 AM, said:

I had to stop reading here. You hate it when the enemy comes prepared to work together and me effective at all ranges/conditions? Shame on a team being a cohesive team!

Gosh maybe the military should stop issuing M-16s to almost every infantryman!

Good job then. You will go far in life. If you HAD kept reading, you would have realized that I made a counter argument to my first paragraph. Also, your analogy was terrible and lacked any comparison to the issue at hand. Way to go, 2/10

[Cyberiad]

The best way to fix LRMs is to remove indirect fire unless target is NARC/TAG'ed or targets are shared using C3 master/slave equipment. Also ECM should just reduce targetable range like it did in MW4. This way we keep LRMs from being overpowered without ECM and completely useless when there is ECM. Right now the system is too binary and it sucks and is not fun. Change it to what I suggest and the game will be way more fun.

[Joseph Mallan]

Kavoh, on 29 October 2014 - 10:21 AM, said:

Good job then. You will go far in life. If you HAD kept reading, you would have realized that I made a counter argument to my first paragraph. Also, your analogy was terrible and lacked any comparison to the issue at hand. Way to go, 2/10

Well for one I have gone far in life. Wife, Kids, home, good job, dependable cars. And I did say I stopped reading so you are likely right I missed any thing you said after. but that is kinda the catch 22 of not reading everything, isn't it?

[Kavoh]

Joseph Mallan, on 29 October 2014 - 10:45 AM, said:

Well for one I have gone far in life. Wife, Kids, home, good job, dependable cars. And I did say I stopped reading so you are likely right I missed any thing you said after. but that is kinda the catch 22 of not reading everything, isn't it?

And I am posting from the ISS. Since you are so successful it should be a bit obvious to not spew BS after stating "stopped reading here" when the reason given was addressed.

[Geek Verve]

The Flying Gecko, on 27 October 2014 - 11:13 PM, said:

The only 'nerf' I'd like to see to LRM's is slightly less cockpit shake and the intensity of the explosions (can't see a damn thing when one of those 6xLRM-5 mechs is letting it rain)

Pretty much this. LRM's have their place in sound tactics. It just seems that their effects are greater than they should be. It's just too easy to load up a LRM boat and wreck someone's capabilities from a point of far less risk.

If they are meant to be used in ways similar to current, real world missile warfare tactics, then a significant increase to LRM cool-down timers would go a long way toward accomplishing that.

[Gorgo7]

Geek Verve, on 29 October 2014 - 11:49 AM, said:

Pretty much this. LRM's have their place in sound tactics. It just seems that their effects are greater than they should be. It's just too easy to load up a LRM boat and wreck someone's capabilities from a point of far less risk.

If they are meant to be used in ways similar to current, real world missile warfare tactics, then a significant increase to LRM cool-down timers would go a long way toward accomplishing that.

Well, you could sport a Gyro Module. It really does a great job of reducing screen shake!

[RalphVargr]

360 degree arc AMS means a point defense system that can scan and fire in the rear arc of the mech. So, any attacker within range should get the equivalent of a single MG shot, and show up on the scope.

But, we can't have things that make sense, like backup cameras, can we?

[RalphVargr]

Once LRM's are effectively removed from play, the next round of complaints on ranged weapons should begin. The list of candidates should be obvious.

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

R Razor, on 28 October 2014 - 03:57 PM, said:

Best news I've read yet today........get rid of IDF without a Narc or Tag lock and see how it works, might be the only change needed, but as it stands now, change is definitely needed, whether the button spammers want to admit it or not is irrelevant now.

itd be hilarious if jamming ecm turned off IFF as well to the mech ECMming XD

RalphVargr, on 29 October 2014 - 02:29 PM, said:

Once LRM's are effectively removed from play, the next round of complaints on ranged weapons should begin. The list of candidates should be obvious.

The funny thing really is the next complaine doesnt nerf them so bad noone uses them anymore.

[Bartholomew bartholomew]

They were all but gone at one time. Oh the glory days. Nobody had AMS..