138 replies to this topic

[Glythe]

This game makes almost zero sense when you look at SRM and LRM launcher options. I don't know when it happened but sometime ago there was a nerf to the larger launchers of both weapons.

It makes no sense that 4x LRM 5 are better than 1x LRM 20. Russ and the team seem dumbfounded by what is going on here but it's quite simple. Somewhere along the line the LRM 20 got nerfed so it mostly doesn't seek center torso, but LRM 5-10s still do so people use those almost exclusively.

You really can't have the smaller version of a weapon dealing more damage than its heavier big brother. Small lasers don't usually do more damage than medium lasers. The smaller variant has a drawback for weighing less..... namely a huge range penalty.

Why then do small clusters of LRMs aim almost exclusively for the torso when large LRM clusters scatter everywhere? That's foolish from a balance perspective and leads to people gaming the system. This is why you see people chain firing LRM 5s because it gives a long range chest seeking weapon.

But the broken nature of this system does not stop with LRMs. We also have SRMs such as the SRM 4 that are deadlier than the SRM6 due to the difference in pinpoint damage. In fact 3x SRM 6 with artemis does less concentrated damage than 4x SRM 4 to a single component.

In both cases the heavier weapon that costs more critical slots and tonnage does less damage to the target than the "weaker" variants. That just isn't right.



LRM/SRM spread should be universal regardless of the number of tubes fired. Please change this for balance reasons.

Edited by Glythe, 07 November 2014 - 01:24 PM.

[Brody319]

LRM 20s launch a fat wall of missiles.
LRM 5s are tiny clusters. It makes sense, more spread of the missiles the more the damage is spread out.
LRM 5s also generate less heat, and reload much faster meaning you can chain fire them to get an almost constant stream of missiles on the enemy. A stream of tightly clustered missiles is better than a wall of missiles. If you made the LRM 20s launch 4 volleys of 5 missiles in a tight cluster you might see more play from them.

[TimePeriod]

I don't even bother with missiles unless I have spare tonnage.

[Walluh]

..why wouldn't 4xLRM5 be better? You're paying FOUR hardpoints for them..?

[The Boz]

Brody319, on 07 November 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

LRM 20s launch a fat wall of missiles.
LRM 5s are tiny clusters. It makes sense, more spread of the missiles the more the damage is spread out.
LRM 5s also generate less heat, and reload much faster meaning you can chain fire them to get an almost constant stream of missiles on the enemy. A stream of tightly clustered missiles is better than a wall of missiles. If you made the LRM 20s launch 4 volleys of 5 missiles in a tight cluster you might see more play from them.

4xLRM5 launches a huge spread of missiles from a lighter and more compact launcher faster.

[Kensaisama]

It's all fun and games until someone takes a hot load of missiles to the face.

[Brody319]

The Boz, on 07 November 2014 - 12:43 PM, said:

4xLRM5 launches a huge spread of missiles from a lighter and more compact launcher faster.

If you chain fire, it sends tiny clusters of 5 missiles. much more compact than the lrm 20. meaning each one can hit the chest with much greater accuracy.

[The Boz]

You don't get it. Four LRM5 launched at the same time have THE SAME SPREAD as ONE LRM5.

[Glythe]

Brody319, on 07 November 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

LRM 20s launch a fat wall of missiles.
LRM 5s are tiny clusters. It makes sense, more spread of the missiles the more the damage is spread out.

You aren't thinking about this from a balance standpoint. The more difficult to mount weapon should be more deadly. Critical space and weight are more valuable than hardpoints from a balance perspective. If I am wrong then show me a 50 ton mech with 4x LRM 20 like we used to see on the Stalker. I could just as easily argue that artillery (which is what LRMs represent) will always be more on target when you fire a larger barrage. The problem here is that you're trying to use real world elements and you're using faulty logic. It's like you're trying to say a minigun is less efficient than having 6 independently mounted gun barrels on an aircraft.

You can't have option A be infinitely superior to option B. In order to make them balanced there has to be a reason to use one weapon or the other. The benefit of the smaller launchers is suposed to be that they are smaller so you can feasibly put a few on lighter mechs. The only benefit of the big launchers right now is that they work on mechs with a few missile hardpoints. But here's where you run into problems because the old mechs.... like the catapult were supposed to "rain/reign" supreme when it comes to firing missiles. A mech like this is ruined with the idea that 4x lighter/smaller launchers is better than 1 big launcher.

What really happens right now is that 4x smaller launchers do "more" damage because they hit the vital areas of the mech. That is the broken part. I realize a lot of people don't want this to change because they like the broken nature of the small launchers. I hate to break it to you..... but that makes for a poor game.

Walluh, on 07 November 2014 - 12:42 PM, said:

..why wouldn't 4xLRM5 be better? You're paying FOUR hardpoints for them..?

One LRM 20 with Artemis is 6 critical slots and 11 tons; meanwhile 4x LRM 5 would be 4 criticals and 10 tons. You really think the lighter launcher that uses less space should have 75% plus of its missiles go to the chest while only 20% of the LRM 20 missiles go to the chest? Let's ignore for a moment that the "homing in on the chest" feature is supposed to be what you are paying with that extra ton from Artemis.

What you actually get for what you pay for with 4x LRM 5s is 8 critical spaces and 14 tons. Yea that would be better than a single LRM 20 but considering that isn't what you pay for you should be getting a lot less.


Bear in mind as well that mechs with lots of hardpoints is an issue of powercreep and not a reason in and of itself for the balancing of missiles.

Edited by Glythe, 07 November 2014 - 01:03 PM.

[Lyoto Machida]

Glythe, on 07 November 2014 - 12:56 PM, said:

You aren't thinking about this from a balance standpoint. The more difficult to mount weapon should be more deadly. Critical space and weight are more valuable than hardpoints from a balance perspective. If I am wrong then show me a 50 ton mech with 4x LRM 20 like we used to see on the Stalker. I could just as easily argue that artillery (which is what LRMs represent) will always be more on target when you fire a larger barrage. The problem here is that you're trying to use real world elements and you're using faulty logic. It's like you're trying to say a minigun is less efficient than having 6 independently mounted gun barrels on an aircraft.

You can't have option A be infinitely superior to option B. In order to make them balanced there has to be a reason to use one weapon or the other. The benefit of the smaller launchers is suposed to be that they are smaller so you can feasibly put a few on lighter mechs. The only benefit of the big launchers right now is that they work on mechs with a few missile hardpoints. But here's where you run into problems because the old mechs.... like the catapult were supposed to "rain/reign" supreme when it comes to firing missiles. A mech like this is ruined with the idea that 4x lighter/smaller launchers is better than 1 big launcher.

What really happens right now is that 4x smaller launchers do "more" damage because they hit the vital areas of the mech. That is the broken part. I realize a lot of people don't want this to change because they like the broken nature of the small launchers. I hate to break it to you..... but that makes for a poor game.

The thing is...there was no Stalker that ever fired 80 tubes at once. Most would shoot 10-6-6-10-10-6-6-10-6-6-2-2 or something. Maybe the one that has 20 in each arm but the other 2 20s would still stream fire based on tube size. I think the spread stays as an LRM 20 area spread though, regardless of tube size.

[Glythe]

Lyoto Machida, on 07 November 2014 - 01:02 PM, said:

The thing is...there was no Stalker that ever fired 80 tubes at once.

You really wanna go there? Ok... so not all the missiles arrived at once. But let's remember that when the 80 LRM stalker was a thing Artemis took at least 80% of the missiles to the target's chest if you had it in sight.

No one survived the LRM volleys of that era. Ok fine you basically got a 30 missile hit immediately followed by a 12 and then another 12 (or however the math worked out... you forgot about opening the doors). Volleys would of course vary depending on which stalker you used and could be as high as 52 for the 3H model.

What happened to most people was that the first volley hit you and took most of your armor in all 3 chest sections. If they twisted a bit while they got into cover the second volley would tear off a side torso. Then they had to cool down a bit because they did just fire ~160 missiles. Not many mechs survived a third direct hit.

Let's not forget that we didn't have several of the really hot maps in this period and there was no ghost heat.


So anyways...lets get back on topic.


LRM 20 should always be better than 4x LRM 5 and likewise SRM 6 with artemis must be better than the SRM 4 without artemis.

Edited by Glythe, 07 November 2014 - 01:14 PM.

[Satan n stuff]

Glythe, on 07 November 2014 - 12:33 PM, said:

OP

4xLRM5 runs hotter than 1xLRM20, even when adjusted for DPS. The difference is 2 heat per shot ( +33% ), which really starts to add up after a while. Builds with all LRM5s heat up really fast compared to builds based on heavier launchers that fire the same number of missiles.

Personally I like to go for one LRM20 or two LRM15s combined with as many LRM5s as the mech can fit. The former adds fodder for AMS so fewer of the more accurate LRM5 missiles get shot down, the latter puts as much damage on target per shot as I possibly can without triggering ghost heat. ( LRM20s generally put fewer missiles on target than LRM15s. )
The first type of build tends to deal lots of damage to a target's CT, the latter has a tight enough spread that most of the missiles will hit the target's torso and fires enough missiles at a time to make up for it's lack of focus.

[KamikazeRat]

i do agree, if you want to launch 20 missles, LRM 20 should be what you take, hardpoints or not.

i hate seeing all these LRM5 boats, spamming them for screen shake effect. it almost feels like abusing an exploit to me.
as far as accuracy, LRM spread should be LRM spread, 5, 20, or 100 should all spread at the rate they spread. implement a cone(albiet a wierd arc-cone...thing), closer shots should be the way to get more accurate hits with more missles on CT farther shots pepper the area, i would like to see an LRM20 at full range only hit with 50-75% even if the target is standing still.

this will make all missle systems as effective, then tube-count and ROF are your concerns when choosing, not accuracy. and it will also make the LRMboats less effective if they don't move up with the main force. a common complaint of those who see LRMs as "no skill"

EDIT: i don't see them as "no skill" i just think that hiding behind a rock lobbing missles at every dorito that pops up is pretty lame...i use LRMs too, frequently at 300-400m....almost never beyond 600m

Edited by KamikazeRat, 07 November 2014 - 01:27 PM.

[Glythe]

Satan n stuff, on 07 November 2014 - 01:14 PM, said:

4xLRM5 runs hotter than 1xLRM20, even when adjusted for DPS.

A large singular mount is going to be more efficient than multiple independent units. If you buy 20 jars of mayo you will pay less per jar than if you only buy 1 jar at a time. You have to remember that this is how weapon systems work.

Also from a balance perspective the extra shake is WAY more than you should get for the pittance of heat you pay as a penalty.

It is sad that you have to game the system by having 1 fake big launcher to eat AMS and a bunch of smaller ones to actually deal damage. That pretty much negates the "IS lrms are better because they fire in big volleys" advantage.

KamikazeRat, on 07 November 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

i do agree, if you want to launch 20 missles, LRM 20 should be what you take, hardpoints or not. i hate seeing all these LRM5 boats, spamming them for screen shake effect. it almost feels like abusing an exploit to me.

I think what you're trying to say is, "LRM spread should be universal regardless of the number of tubes fired."

That was the premise of my post but I did not explicitly say that up front... let me go take care of that.

Edited by Glythe, 07 November 2014 - 01:24 PM.

[Thorqemada]

The LRM 90 Mad Dog is scary if you get caught in the open but not very practical every other way...like all LRMs.

[Satan n stuff]

Glythe, on 07 November 2014 - 01:21 PM, said:

A large singular mount is going to be more efficient than multiple independent units. If you buy 20 jars of mayo you will pay less per jar than if you only buy 1 jar at a time. You have to remember that this is how weapon systems work.

Also from a balance perspective the extra shake is WAY more than you should get for the pittance of heat you pay as a penalty.

It is sad that you have to game the system by having 1 fake big launcher to eat AMS and a bunch of smaller ones to actually deal damage. That pretty much negates the "IS lrms are better because they fire in big volleys" advantage.

When your LRM20 spread is as wide as an Atlas is tall, you have to find some way to make it work.
I do agree that given it's other stats the spread should be tighter, it's tied with the LRM10 for least weight efficient standard guidance launcher, so at the very least the standard guidance version should be a lot more accurate.
With Artemis it's the second most weight efficient launcher ( 0.55 tons per missile versus 0.533... tons per missile for the LRM15 ) but it's accuracy is still awful.

Edit: My approach to using LRM20s doesn't work with clans because only 5 of the missiles will get into AMS range at the same time as the LRM5 missiles, so once those are gone AMS will always target the LRM5s. I have noticed that the streamed LRMs are a bit more accurate than the frontloaded ones though.

Edited by Satan n stuff, 07 November 2014 - 01:35 PM.

[Angel of Annihilation]

Don't forget Artemis. Artemis on an LRM20 is only 1 ton additonal weight. Artemis on 4 LRM5s is 4 tons additional weight and 4 more crits.

Basically you got to look at the whole picture when comparing.

[Glythe]

Viktor Drake, on 07 November 2014 - 01:32 PM, said:

Basically you got to look at the whole picture when comparing.

If you had read the whole thread you would have realized this was already covered. But I'll give you bullet points.... 4x LRM 5 fires about 3-4 times as many missiles in the chest than 1x LRM 20 with artemis. That is the very definition of broken if you ask me.

Thorqemada, on 07 November 2014 - 01:24 PM, said:

The LRM 90 Mad Dog is scary if you get caught in the open but not very practical every other way...like all LRMs.

Well the old boat stalker looked something like this:

http://mwo.smurfy-ne...0fe37e5c6f3e896


You say well that's completely impractical...... it was. Except that you could kill people in 3-4 shots at 1000m so it didn't matter that you really didn't use armor. Again though.... part of what made this work was smaller teams and no ghost heat.

That is one thing I will say about 12 man teams..... if everyone brings AMS then missiles are overall less effective. But most people don't bring AMS (because there is no reward for doing so).

Edited by Glythe, 07 November 2014 - 01:38 PM.

[Brody319]

LRM 5's are 2 tons.
LRM 10's are 5 tons
LRM 15's are 7 tons.
LRM 20's are 10 tons.

So 2 LRM 5s weight 1 ton less than 10s, 1 ton less than 15s, and 2 tons less than 20s for the same number of missiles.

so they have the weight advantage.


Now for slots:
5s are 1 slots
10s are 2 slots
15s are 3 slots
20s are 5 slots.

So 5s have the advantage in both weight and number of slots.


Now heat:
5s = 2
10s = 4
15s = 5
20s = 6

So here the LRM 5s actually are worse. For the same number of missiles as an LRM 20 they generate 8 heat.
So using larger launchers has a heat advantage.


So the LRM 5s are better in slots, weight, clustering.
And are only worse when it comes to heat.
Damage isnt important, as all missiles deal 1 damage so they are all liner in comparison.

So yea some imbalance here.

[Pjwned]

Brody319, on 07 November 2014 - 12:38 PM, said:

LRM 20s launch a fat wall of missiles.
LRM 5s are tiny clusters. It makes sense, more spread of the missiles the more the damage is spread out.
LRM 5s also generate less heat, and reload much faster meaning you can chain fire them to get an almost constant stream of missiles on the enemy. A stream of tightly clustered missiles is better than a wall of missiles. If you made the LRM 20s launch 4 volleys of 5 missiles in a tight cluster you might see more play from them.

That's not how it should be with AMS so readily available, especially after a pretty decent buff to AMS with its doubled ammo per ton now.