126 replies to this topic

[Xtrekker]

Uh, that's what I do now for the blobs of ECM mechs.

[-Halcyon-]

Kilo 40, on 29 October 2014 - 09:52 PM, said:

time to close the thread then.

Why don't you quote the rest of what I said.

Just because you disagree doesn't mean the thread should be closed. Don't like the discussion, don't post in it. Simple.

Edited by Halcyon201, 29 October 2014 - 10:08 PM.

[Karl Marlow]

Halcyon201, on 29 October 2014 - 09:10 PM, said:

Why should the other 11 mechs get to target me with precision guided missiles with ZERO line of sight, and without any TAG or NARC help from the other mech I'm fighting?

Why should him targeting me automatically allow every other team member to target me AND fire missiles AND have them hit me?

Because that is the way the game is coded. Those are the rules of the game. It's not a mystery. It isnt some exploit or trick the enemy is using. It is part of the fundamental game mechanics that has been a part of this game for about 2 years now.

l2p.

[-Halcyon-]

TheRealAbray, on 29 October 2014 - 09:57 PM, said:

Man you almost got me, but you got everybody before me. So for that I give you

9/10

Nice troll post, you're getting plenty of food.

But if you're actually that stupid and you're being serious, quit bitching about the most underpowered weapon in the game. Tag and narc are counters to ecm, which isn't canon either. So shut your ***** mouth and don't brawl like a dimwit.

I can't believe i'm even explaining this. We all fell for this troll. The only thing even remotely OP about lrms is the ******* screen shake. Get a clue.

lol
11/10 for your rage filled response. Would post again.

Xtrekker, on 29 October 2014 - 09:54 PM, said:

Again, where this functionality is supposed to come from, C3 -- Total warfare, pages 131 - 133. PGI chose to ignore/substitute it, among other things, and in part some of these omissions (particularly information warfare) resulted in trying to "balance" more stuff.

And if they intend for the game to play like this, I would ask what is actually being "balanced" by omitting it?

Edited by Marvyn Dodgers, 30 October 2014 - 03:30 PM.
Link to copyright violation in quote

[El Bandito]

Halcyon201, on 29 October 2014 - 10:13 PM, said:

LRMs aren't OP. The way they use targeting is.

Shared targeting is a part of LRM in MWO. You call one aspect OP, you are calling the entire weapon system OP.

For newbies, the LRM storm does seem formidable, but learning to deal with it very easy, even in Caustic. To this day, in my thousands of games, I died to confirmed NARC induced LRM death on Caustic once. I died to 1-shot Artillery Strike more often than that.

Edited by El Bandito, 29 October 2014 - 10:17 PM.

[Mercules]

Halcyon201, on 29 October 2014 - 09:19 PM, said:

Then why did they even bother putting a TAG in the game if you can do the exact same thing without having to equip it?

It doesn't do the same thing. TAG allows indirect fire to be more precise. In MWO that means it shortens lock on time and condenses the missile spread.

Xtrekker, on 29 October 2014 - 09:29 PM, said:

You didn't know? We're all running around with a free 5 ton C3 Master computer built in.

You didn't know? Mechs without C3 can spot for indirect fire all the time in TT? Since you seem to have the rules, go read about Indirect Fire.

Halcyon201, on 29 October 2014 - 09:42 PM, said:

The primary function of the TAG is to allow others to target what you're lasing. It's a targeting laser, and yet others can already target what you're targeting without a TAG being used at all.
I know it provides other benefits but it's primary function is being discarded because you can already do that function for free without it.

It makes 0 sense to me.

In TT Tag is mostly to guide in Arrow IV missile which are artillery level missiles that can carry various payloads.

KuroNyra, on 29 October 2014 - 09:49 PM, said:

The problem is in the lore and in the book.
Unless you have a special component. You cannot send the target data to the other's and you keep it for you.
That is why NARC and TAG were used.

Um... what?

Quote

Units armed with LRM-type weapons may fire those missiles
indirectly. Indirect fire allows a unit that does not have a
direct line of sight to a target to attack that target, though some
friendly unit must have a valid line of sight to the target (this
unit is referred to as the spotter).

[Xtrekker]

Halcyon201, on 29 October 2014 - 10:11 PM, said:

And if they intend for the game to play like this, I would ask what is actually being "balanced" by omitting it?

I didn't mean they were balancing the game with its omission. I meant that much of the way the game plays is based on PGI's version of information warfare, and because of this various weapons systems have become either over- or under-effective. This has resulted in nerfs/buffs to those systems to compensate, which they seem to be very poor at accomplishing. It's a butterfly effect.

[Thorn Hallis]

You're 30 years to late to complain.

[-Halcyon-]

Mercules, on 29 October 2014 - 10:18 PM, said:

Mechs without C3 can spot for indirect fire all the time in TT

Indirect fire. In MWO, the missiles will track you if you move as long as your target is also targeting you. Nothing indirect about that.

[Kilo 40]

Halcyon201, on 29 October 2014 - 10:08 PM, said:

Why don't you quote the rest of what I said.

Because you started out complaining that TAG wasn't being used to target you and how that was logically inconsistent to you. I explained to you why it was consistent, and apparently you agreed. we wasn't talking about C3.

Quote

Just because you disagree doesn't mean the thread should be closed.

I never said that it SHOULD be closed, or that it should be closed because I disagreed with it.

[Davegt27]

Mom they hitting me with LRMs again

honey why don't you get your play doh out that will be more fun

[-Halcyon-]

Kilo 40, on 29 October 2014 - 10:32 PM, said:

Because you started out complaining that TAG wasn't being used to target you and how that was logically inconsistent to you. I explained to you why it was consistent, and apparently you agreed. we wasn't talking about C3.



I never said that it SHOULD be closed, or that it should be closed because I disagreed with it.

You said "time to close the thread." Stop playing word games, and stop taking things out of context.

You asked how did I know someone wasn't using TAG or NARC on me while I was engaged. My basic response was, why does it matter? This thread isn't to prove that you can share targeting data without a TAG. I have explained what I find wrong with the system crystal clear.
If you don't understand by this point, then nothing will help you. Sorry.

[Scratx]

OP, the short of it is, yes, it's Working as Designed. Always has been.

The question you're actually wanting an answer for is "Should LRMs be allowed to be fired indirectly at targets without NARC or TAG illuminating them?"

Naturally, this has been a topic for some time.

[Kilo 40]

Halcyon201, on 29 October 2014 - 10:38 PM, said:

You said "time to close the thread." Stop playing word games, and stop taking things out of context.

project much?

Quote

You asked how did I know someone wasn't using TAG or NARC on me while I was engaged. My basic response was, why does it matter? This thread isn't to prove that you can share targeting data without a TAG. I have explained what I find wrong with the system crystal clear.
If you don't understand by this point, then nothing will help you. Sorry.

do you even know what it is you're trying to say at this point?

[Khaze]

I think it might be a refreshing change if sharing targeting data did indeed require specialized equipment.

Then, finally, slap the integrated VOIP in to this game and force people to actually verbally communicate with each other on the whereabouts of the enemy.

[-Halcyon-]

Kilo 40, on 29 October 2014 - 10:50 PM, said:

do you even know what it is you're trying to say at this point?

Yes. 100% clear, and others understand too. I'm sorry you don't.

Edited by Halcyon201, 29 October 2014 - 11:07 PM.

[Kaspirikay]

Please don't change it. I fit my DDC for LRM spamming and its getting me a lot of cbills.

[Mercules]

Halcyon201, on 29 October 2014 - 10:32 PM, said:

Indirect fire. In MWO, the missiles will track you if you move as long as your target is also targeting you. Nothing indirect about that.

Indirect Fire simply means firing on a target without having Line of Sight to the target. If you have Line of Sight to a target that is Direct Fire. You really don't want to play, "Who is more pedantic?" with me.

[Mcgral18]

Xtrekker, on 29 October 2014 - 09:29 PM, said:

You didn't know? We're all running around with a free 5 ton C3 Master computer built in.

KuroNyra, on 29 October 2014 - 09:49 PM, said:

The problem is in the lore and in the book.
Unless you have a special component. You cannot send the target data to the other's and you keep it for you.
That is why NARC and TAG were used.

But that's unless your playing MW:O.
And yes, that is a problem. Remove that and you would have the ability for the scout to use that particular device, use there NARC or TAG.

And they would have an even better role on the battlefield.

Halcyon201, on 29 October 2014 - 09:50 PM, said:

I agree, C3 was supposed to be another way to do it, but right now every mech gets C3 for free by default. Everyone has it and no one spent a single Cbill to get it, used any slots to equip it, or freed up any tonnage for it.

I'm not sure you guys know that a C3 computer does.

If there was a spotter at 50M, and a LRMer at 900M, the thing that a C3 computer would do is make the missiles hit in 0.3 seconds instead of 5.5 seconds.

It makes the shooter connected to a C3 network have the spotters range for the to hit roll. In MWO, that could be travel speed. Also works for AC20s, PPCs, lasers, or any other weapon.


Anything can spot for indirect fire. That gives the shooter a +1; that's it.

[Dauntless Blint]

This thread is as close to junk as it get's use more AMS/ECM/terrain and team mates and deal with what's in front of you.Change your mech according to the meta,that's what keep's thing's fresh.