MischiefSC, on 01 November 2014 - 06:39 PM, said:
Most of us are 40 and up. That ain't new. Saying that we need to have easy to use auto-locking weapons for indirect fire because not all of us are keen on the twitch reflexes isn't a reasonable game balance argument to make. You've got to recognize that.
Usually I agree with your posts, but I think you might be dead wrong on this one. IMO, buffing direct and nerfing indirect is as likely to move MWO further towards being just a simple look-shoot twitch game as it is to move it in the other direction. From my experience, I would guess that the issue (if there is an issue at all) with LRMs lies more in PGI's overpowered ECM and ineffective AMS. An implementation of ECM that was less all-or-nothing might have been a wiser move on Paul's part and might have given us a bit more variety in gameplay. The steady erosion of ECM's abilities over various patches suggests that PGI have appreciated this and have been trying to take corrective action.
However, it would be relatively easy for PGI to run different LRM and ECM configurations on their test server. It would be very interesting to try out different LRM speeds and missile groupings. At present, we're really just guessing how altering LRMs would pan out in actual gameplay.