5 replies to this topic

[Lionsroar]

I know that any improvements to LRMS right now will be about as popular as the proverbial fart in church, but this is more of a safety feature. When launching LRMS if you lose target lock the next volley will be targeted where ever your cross hairs were pointing. Often when launching multiple volleys from multiple launchers there is no time to react, a quarter second after the lock disappears your finger is depressing the fire button and that volley often lands in the back of a teammate.

What I propose, is that for one second-to give you time to react, after losing lock, that any LRMS fired be targetted at the geographical location of the last lock. Not at the previously locked target, but at the patch of dirt where he/she was standing. Instead of in the back of the Atlas in your lance. So this is more of a "safety issue" not an improvement.

So for one second after losing lock LRMS would be targeted at the spot where their last target had been standing.

[The Mechiac]

The target decay module already adds a couple seconds to your lock-on.

If you click when you shouldn't have that's more your own fault then any fault with the Lrms.

Being careful about friendly fire with Lrms is no different than with any other weapon and does not need a "saftey cushion".

[Nightmare1]

Mechiac, on 02 November 2014 - 10:08 PM, said:

The target decay module already adds a couple seconds to your lock-on.

If you click when you shouldn't have that's more your own fault then any fault with the Lrms.

Being careful about friendly fire with Lrms is no different than with any other weapon and does not need a "saftey cushion".

But LRMs are already so automated! Surely one more built-in, auto-play feature won't matter?

Meh, I don't think that LRM'ers need this. Learn trigger control like us direct-fire folk who know how to slug it out face to face with our foes.

[Telmasa]

As usual, Nightmare1 misses the point because he believes the way he plays the game is the only one and true path to the Way Things Ought To Be....



I get the point the OP makes, completely. Your missiles being targeted at an area 650m away, and suddenly switching from firing out there, to hitting the top of a hill 50m in front of your face, isn't intuitive in the slightest and a constant source of agitaton, and in the case of clanner LRMs often means putting damage into the back components of friendly mechs who inadvertently stray into the reticule-adjusted path, and have no possible warning about it; never a good thing.


It's not very likely that those LRMs would hit anything if they continued to the geographical location of the mech you had lock on, after you lost lock; it's the principle of the thing, that losing lock oughtn't mean your missiles immediately switch to hitting whatever is immediately in front of your reticule.

The delay he's talking about is very fair, too, only a second or two so that chain-fired groups aren't affected as hard by this problem.
If it were 3-5 seconds or so instead, it could start to be a bit much, and essentially become yet another form of indirect artillery fire.

Which as you can probably guess, is not something I think we need more of.

[Nightmare1]

Telmasa, on 03 November 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

As usual, Nightmare1 misses the point because he believes the way he plays the game is the only one and true path to the Way Things Ought To Be....

Wow, character assassination much? You really need to work on that attitude there; it's not going to win you any friends.

Telmasa, on 03 November 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

I get the point the OP makes, completely. Your missiles being targeted at an area 650m away, and suddenly switching from firing out there, to hitting the top of a hill 50m in front of your face, isn't intuitive in the slightest and a constant source of agitaton, and in the case of clanner LRMs often means putting damage into the back components of friendly mechs who inadvertently stray into the reticule-adjusted path, and have no possible warning about it; never a good thing.

You say it isn't intuitive. I say that it's no different from firing a ballistic weapon into a hill 50m in front of you. The weapons go where the reticules point the moment you lose your lock; what's so hard to understand about that? What's not intuitive about that? If you're worried about dropping LRMs on friendlies, then walk ten meters to the side and fire from there.

Even when friendlies stray into the path, it is no different from when they may stray into the path of a Gauss round or lasers. Simply put, sometimes luck befalls us so that well-aimed shots go awry due to clueless teammates. However, I do not expect PGI to implement a Guass, AC, Laser, or SRM avoidance feature to prevent accidental team fire.

Telmasa, on 03 November 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

It's not very likely that those LRMs would hit anything if they continued to the geographical location of the mech you had lock on, after you lost lock; it's the principle of the thing, that losing lock oughtn't mean your missiles immediately switch to hitting whatever is immediately in front of your reticule.

Well, when you lose your lock, you lose your lock. If you haven't fired the missiles in your tubes, then the targeting data isn't loaded into them. Bottomline, just accept the lost of an LRM volley. I've been running LRMs since I hurt my wrist (can't use my brawlers or JJ'ers at this time), so I've been catching up on LRMs since some of the recent nerfs and buffs. Frankly, they work pretty well. I would occasionally lose an LRM volley into the dirt when I lost my lock, but, after a few matches, it got a lot easier to predict how long the locks would last. Take Canyon Network for example. There are a limited number of places where a Mech can hide from LRMs. Simply watching the movement of your targeting box would let you know about how long you had before your target reached cover. I simply had to stop shooting before then to conserve my ammo. Sometimes I lost lock prematurely as a Narc wore off or a friendly spotter was forced to abandon pursuit. In those cases, I would lose an LRM 10 or 15 volley. That's disappointing, but it's hardly more consequential than missing with a Guass, PPC, or AC10. Why should LRMs get special treatment over those systems?

As for hitting friendly units, it's easy to avoid that. Like I mentioned previously, just don't stand in line with a friendly Mech. Stand to the side a little, and your shots will miss if your lock fails, even though they may land nearby. That's just common sense.

Telmasa, on 03 November 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

The delay he's talking about is very fair, too, only a second or two so that chain-fired groups aren't affected as hard by this problem.
If it were 3-5 seconds or so instead, it could start to be a bit much, and essentially become yet another form of indirect artillery fire.

There is already a built-in delay for LRMs upon losing sight. This can be countered with Radar Deprivation or extended with Advanced Targeting Delay. However, despite the built-in delay, this thread exists, proving that delays themselves will not be a fix for this perceived problem. Even if this delay is implemented, LRM pilots will still fire a bit too long trying to take advantage of the fact that their LRMs will hit that location, and wind up having some fall short when the delay ends. The bottomline, is that some LRM players such as yourself feel like their auto-targeting missiles shouldn't just miss upon losing lock, and want a specialized bonus to ensure that their LRMs don't fall short. I don't see many forum posts from ballistic, SRM, or laser users asking for similar boons in the event they miss their shots; why do you expect preferential treatment?

Finally, it is a bad idea for the delay, because it can affect your ability to halt oncoming charges. I have seen instances while spectating LRM boaters, pilots lose their locks due to sudden ECM coverage, but are able to still accurately put LRM volleys downrange via dumb fire. One example comes to mind. Despite losing lock, a pilot I spectated a while back was able to instantly shift his reticule and continue spamming LRMs into an oncoming rush without a lock, successfully killing a Mech and causing two more to break off and retreat thus weakening the overall attack and saving our team from a roll. He would not have been able to accomplish this if his LRMs were auto-locked to some point behind the enemy team due to your desired delay time.

Telmasa, on 03 November 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

Which as you can probably guess, is not something I think we need more of.

Yeah, we got that. Let's keep from crossing topics here.


Edit: Btw, your scenario involves dropping LRMs 50 meters in front of you. You do know that IS LRMs do not deal damage within 180 meters, yes? And that Clan LRMs have an exponential damage curve, so that they really don't deal much damage until you get past 100 meters?

Frankly, if you're more than 300 meters from your team, you are placing your LRM boat in jeopardy since it starts to become easier for fast attack Mechs to close and pick you apart before your teammates can effectively respond. It's best to stay about 100 meters from the group; far enough for your LRMs to clear friendly Mechs, but close enough for protection and to nullify any potential damage should your LRMs fall short.

Edited by Nightmare1, 03 November 2014 - 09:02 PM.

[Pz_DC]

IMHO LRMs need to act like SSRM - no lock=no fire. Anyway we have no way to lock location....

Edited by MGA121285, 03 November 2014 - 04:31 PM.