43 replies to this topic

[Lightfoot]

Well LRMs are designed in MWO to give Scout mechs a definitive role in MWO. Not to make LRMs work for the player shooting them. If they were meant to work for the player who carries them then Artemis would be giving that 35% accuracy boost Battle Tech says it should.

You know that right? The indirect fire role of LRMs is meant to give Scout mechs a greater role and that is why LRMs generally work so poorly that you are required to use the indirect fire method. I mean some player's heads explode if LRMs work too well now so what was nerfed was the direct fire /LoS role.





.

Edited by Lightfoot, 09 March 2015 - 08:18 PM.

[Random Carnage]

For most mechs this probably isn't a big deal because they're mobile enough to have a chance. Where it becomes painful is for the Assults that invariably get left behind as their "team" charges off into the distance, followed closely by a 3L Raven popping its nose over a hill 400m away just long enough for us to think "ah crap" before the rain begins.

[Threat Doc]

I would like to know where the information came from concerning the C3 systems, and I mean absolute specifics, please? It would be nice to know if PGI are actually going with BattleTech TT rule numbers rather than just the feel. Everything else in the game, numbers-wise, is so screwed up, it's stupid, but the "FEEL" of the game is almost absolutely correct, otherwise. So, I SERIOUSLY doubt PGI are going to start going with TT numbers, now.

[Threat Doc]

Lightfoot, on 09 March 2015 - 02:42 PM, said:

I think most players fear highly skilled LRM pilots entering the game. And LRMs are bugged right now as far as I can tell. So if they suddenly start working again expect a lot of players to go mad with missile-hate.

There is one remedy to this... stock 'Mechs only. Players want to ***** and complain and moan and groan about how nasty missiles are, when they're not as nasty as any other weapon in the game, they are simply a one-point-for-one-point equalizer that, if used properly, will help keep your opponents head down, but a bunch of whiney babies want nothing more than to malign them and cry over their use. STOP IT, YOU CHILDREN!

You want a game where customization between matches is encouraged and available? Well, you're going to get nasty builds that are going to use weapons you don't like. I don't like direct-fire weapons at all, because they hit with pinpoint accuracy rather than on a Random Number Generator for to-hit determination and random locations, as in the tabletop, and yet there is no disgust over ballistic weapons and how hard they hit, or how lasers are the ultimate twitcher weapon, point-and-click. I have to have some manner of equalizer because I have real difficulty with those weapons, hence the LRMs. I am skilled with the use of LRMs like most folks are skilled with twitcher guns.

[WintermuteOmega]

There i am, thinking i am really bad at Lurms. But a quick look at my stats being avrg. 35% to hit and even 53% on LRM10s turns out: I rule at lurming!! Thanks for letting me feel good about myself!

Saying they are inaccurate is true, but with 1.5k+ Missiles you still can make a living. Saying a LURM-Boat is is an easy Target is true, as long as you can close the distance of 1000 meters without being spotted, targeted and then rained upon with 40-60 Missiles per volley.That is, if not 2 or 3 Boats are in play. A lone Lurmer is managable. 2 or 3 of Lurmboats WRECK you in seconds. No time (and too much shake etc.) to hide behind Walls etc.

And there in lies the real threat. When you peek out some positions facing 12 Mechs with Lasers and AC's is just as deadly. Thats your own mistake. But 1 well hidden Spotter and 2 or 3 Lurmboats=death and not much to do about it.

[Strum Wealh]

Kay Wolf, on 10 March 2015 - 05:13 AM, said:

I would like to know where the information came from concerning the C3 systems, and I mean absolute specifics, please? It would be nice to know if PGI are actually going with BattleTech TT rule numbers rather than just the feel. Everything else in the game, numbers-wise, is so screwed up, it's stupid, but the "FEEL" of the game is almost absolutely correct, otherwise. So, I SERIOUSLY doubt PGI are going to start going with TT numbers, now.

Well, I pointed out how what we actually have in MWO is NOT C3, but the integrated data sharing system canonically included in every BattleMech ever built (and all other battlefield units), complete with references to specific passages in both Total Warfare and TechManual (including the statement in the BT gameplay rules that specifically & explicitly states that C3 does nothing with regard to indirect-fire LRMs... except where a C3 Master Unit can emulate a TAG system, which allows for the use of Semi-Guided LRMs).

In response, Tincan Nightmare did a copy-paste of the LRM Indirect Fire rules (including all of the various to-hit modifiers, some of which are not applicable to MWO for obvious reasons), as they are found on page 111 of Total Warfare.

Also, it should be noted that C3 also has some additional characteristics as described by the additional rules found in Tactical Operations:

• "Any weapon attack from a weapon at Extreme Range using a C3 System adds 1 range bracket beyond the closest friendly unit in the C3 system. For example, if a weapon is firing at Extreme Range and the closest friendly unit is at Short Range, the firing unit would determine the final Modified To-Hit Number as though the closest friendly unit was at Medium Range." - TacOps, pg. 85
  
• "Note that any C3 System is incompatible with LOS Range If a weapon is firing at LOS Range, it cannot make use of a C3 network." - TacOps, pg. 85
  
• C3 master computers & improved C3 ("C3i") computers can make use of any standard remote sensor units within a radius of 2010 meters (67 hexes), as stated on pafe 224 of TacOps.
  
• There are also a host of C3 off-shoots, all out-of-timeline for MWO, that have their own particular additional rulesets, listed on pages 297-299 of TacOps.

Moreover, the core rules common to all C3 systems (including the bit I mentioned earlier about how C3 does nothing for indirect-fire LRMs, except where a C3 Master Unit can emulate a TAG system & allow for the use of Semi-Guided LRMs) can be found on pages 131-133 of Total Warfare.

Edited by Strum Wealh, 10 March 2015 - 10:51 AM.

[Threat Doc]

Alright, TMI... I have a bunch to do before I head off to work for the afternoon and night, so I'll keep these in my inbox and read them, again, tomorrow some time. Thank you for posting all of that, by the way.

Edited by Kay Wolf, 10 March 2015 - 08:55 AM.

[Lightfoot]

Kay Wolf, on 10 March 2015 - 05:28 AM, said:

There is one remedy to this... stock 'Mechs only. Players want to ***** and complain and moan and groan about how nasty missiles are, when they're not as nasty as any other weapon in the game, they are simply a one-point-for-one-point equalizer that, if used properly, will help keep your opponents head down, but a bunch of whiney babies want nothing more than to malign them and cry over their use. STOP IT, YOU CHILDREN!

You want a game where customization between matches is encouraged and available? Well, you're going to get nasty builds that are going to use weapons you don't like. I don't like direct-fire weapons at all, because they hit with pinpoint accuracy rather than on a Random Number Generator for to-hit determination and random locations, as in the tabletop, and yet there is no disgust over ballistic weapons and how hard they hit, or how lasers are the ultimate twitcher weapon, point-and-click. I have to have some manner of equalizer because I have real difficulty with those weapons, hence the LRMs. I am skilled with the use of LRMs like most folks are skilled with twitcher guns.

Stock mechs are not balanced. Not at all. I have played in pvp MechWarrior leagues that have a stock mechs only option and everyone brings the same 3 to 4 mechs that have good load-outs by blind luck and the rest of the mechs are never used. Also Clans have the best stock mechs by huge margins. It is actually much more balanced to just let players build their own perfect mech.

Funny that players complain about LRMs killing them in 20-30 seconds of continuous firing when medium lasers kill them in 4 to 8 seconds. It's the missile-hater thing. Some players just think guided weapons are cheating and they always will. They think they would win because only the skill-less use LRMs, but it's rarely that way in MWO. LRMs are totally worthless against skilled players.

[Threat Doc]

Strum Wealh and Lightfoot, thank you; all you've said is true, and should put a stop to the temper trantrums of children hating LRMs.

So, the stock 'Mechs are not well-balanced. But, then, the question is... even in a video game, does absolute balance have to be done or, perhaps, is there another way... oh, I don't know, through the use of matching Battle Value, where 'Mechs would not need to be balanced against one another, but might be matched based on their own natural game merits against others who are matched the same?

[LordNothing]

you know you could fix the whole problem with a sane implementation of c3.

when 2 (friendly) mechs are in line of sight of eachother, they make up a c3 network and can share targeting information.

if another friendly mech is in line of sight of one of the first 2, it joins the network and can share data with the other 2.

so hitting r pretty much only shares the target with the other mechs in your network, the lone lrm boat back at the base is not on the network and doesnt get any targeting data. there can be multiple networks on the map at any given time. this also gives lights another role of being c3 sattelites to help keep the networks connected.

do this and you can keep the indirect fire rules and pretty much leave lerms unchanged (and even give them a small buff in return).

[Lightfoot]

Buff Line of Sight. It seems few players scout for LRM support suddenly. Is this because of the recent Challenges requiring or weighting Kills higher than Assists? I also see players accusing teammates and LRM support of Kill Stealing and that seems to be from some other game, but it is suddenly being applied to MWO. I know just a month ago players were mostly happy to have some LRM support hitting their target, but the past week or two no one is providing indirect fire target info in most matches.

So maybe PGI needs to do more LRM Scout encouragement or maybe LoS needs to be buffed or maybe both.

LoS buffs that would not be OP would be to buff LoS Artemis to give a bit greater accuracy and have the missiles travel mostly straight to the target with only slight arcing to clear obstacles. So say I am under the cargo deck in Crimson Straight firing Artemis LRMs with LoS at 500 meters on my target mech and the LRMs do not hit the ceiling. This is something Artemis LRMs should be doing now anyway, but the lower arc would increase the speed to the target by a small amount and make the missile hit footprint much more like a direct-fire weapon hitting the facing side of the target. With no LoS, Artemis LRMs would fire normally as they do now.

Edited by Lightfoot, 15 March 2015 - 01:50 AM.

[VinJade]

I thought the b****ing came about because of the event that happened where you need x - kills & y - assists to earn points.
its normally during those events do I ever hear people b****ing over LRMs and scouts for kill stealing.

people need understand that BT is a joint Team kill game.
always has been from the very start of the game up and to this point.

I use to scout for my teams early on and stopped after I was b****ed at for not pulling my weight.

so I was like to hell with that and saved up and got me an Adder and made it a Missile support unit and was doing some nice damage and then was accused of stealing kills and from that point on I just kept using LRMs even if they are weapons that have more counters to them than an ECM.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

had a game on alpine yesterday, i dunno who spotted but a jenner was moving onto our heavy lance (he didn't know our position) just seconds before he would slide down to us (i'm in a timber, an ac40 jager and a cataphract) our friendly missileboat hat to open fire from 1km away (which went into the other side of the mountain long after the lock broke)
that jenner got 3 kills that game.
triple facepalm from our heavy lance, thanks captain missilederp!

[VinJade]

I remember a week or so back seen a spider closing in on a group of mediums from the HPG map and managed to nail it with a flight of lrms before it could surprise attack them.

not too sure what happened to it after the mediums turned on it as I was already tangling with a Stalker (C) who had been harassing a few others.

[Threat Doc]

LOADED, on 15 March 2015 - 05:08 AM, said:

that jenner got 3 kills that game.
triple facepalm from our heavy lance, thanks captain missilederp!

Sounds to me like that Jenner pilot was doing EXACTLY what he was supposed to do, as were the missile boats. Cry and complain all you want, but it sounds to me like those guys were actually filling their roles, despite the fact PGI has completely failed to define roles, as yet.

[B L O O D W I T C H]

Kay Wolf, on 15 March 2015 - 08:43 AM, said:

Sounds to me like that Jenner pilot was doing EXACTLY what he was supposed to do, as were the missile boats. Cry and complain all you want, but it sounds to me like those guys were actually filling their roles, despite the fact PGI has completely failed to define roles, as yet.

filling their roles? so alarming enemy mechs about nearby danger. preventing friendly mechs to either damage or take out enemy mechs so they (the enemy ofc) can withdraw unharmed and kill 3 mechs of our team.
r u cerial?!
i always thought missileboat are into firesupport, suppression fire and that kind of stuff.

[JaxRiot]

Im still pretty new but I run a slightly tweaked Stalker-F (C) as LRM support and I feel that for the most part LRMs are fine.

if anything, I guess LRMs could use a slight damage buff but only because they can be avoided pretty easily. Just get behind something to break the lock and and/or block the missiles youre safe mostly and of course ECMs to not even be target locked at all.

TAG and Artemis really only work for Line Of Sight and besides the faster Lock that TAG provides I havnt seen much of a benefit from Artemis even with Line of Sight and Ive tried builds both with Artemis and without and both with TAG and without. Even though I have Artemis right now, I wouldn't miss it if I took it off.

Edit: It costs 250k to equip Artemis plus causes your launchers to cost more, weigh more, and take more slots. I feel it should be more impactful imo, but that's just me.

In my own personal opinion the only real thing hindering LRMs or even Streaks simply ECMs. Right now they seem to be the Be-All End-All in the game right now. The team with the most ECM generally does much better. Even UAV isn't much help against ECM for targeting purposes. You may know where they are but still cant target them very well if at all, and even though TAG helps you must have Line of Sigh or it wont help against ECM at all.

That's how CW is going with those Light Rushes everyone talks about. They get the fastest mechs with as much ECM as they can to rush in because it takes the defense too long to lock them for missile support and they are moving too fast to catch plus the cover of terrain to hinder LoS. Then they come in heavy, again, with as much ECM as possible to do as much damage as they can without being target locked back.

So anyway, LRMs are fine imo. Its just the defensive mechanics that hinder or negate target locks that hurt LRM users.

I should note though that I love my LRM Stalker. I do just fine with it in pugs even with all of the ECM

Cheers

Jax

Edited by JaxRiot, 15 March 2015 - 02:31 PM.

[Threat Doc]

LOADED, on 15 March 2015 - 01:27 PM, said:

filling their roles? so alarming enemy mechs about nearby danger. preventing friendly mechs to either damage or take out enemy mechs so they (the enemy ofc) can withdraw unharmed and kill 3 mechs of our team.
r u cerial?!
i always thought missileboat are into firesupport, suppression fire and that kind of stuff.

Speak to me in English, pustule! Insect! "r u cerial?!" indeed. If you are a CHILD continue to speak thus.

Next time, explain your story better. I returned to your previous post to read it again and, from the way it's written, I stand by my response.

Edited by Kay Wolf, 15 March 2015 - 03:24 PM.

[VinJade]

@ Kay Wolf
its not their fault, it seems net speak has taken hold of the younger generation and have forgotten that net speak is for text and Instant Messaging.

anyways I must agree with Jax.

The LRM boats have more counters than an ECM does.

before anyone says "PPCs, B/AP, ECMs, and TAG are counters.."

Need I remind you that Clan APs does not do it for all ECM units but one at a time, PPCs only screw with it for such limited time that you could never get a lock on it before you lose it, TAG the mech is in more danger than the enemy is, and ECM is the only counter against itself.

[JaxRiot]

the IS B.A.P is the same isn't it? At least that's what it says here:

http://mwo.gamepedia...le_Active_Probe

-
The Beagle Active Probe, or BAP, is a sensor suite that enhances the units onboard detection systems. Essentially it boosts radar coverage, locking and scan strength. It also can counter ECM at close range.

• 25% increased sensor range^[3]
  
• 25% decreased target info acquisition time^[3]
  
• Allows targeting of unpowered 'Mechs within 120m^[3]
  
• It counters 1 ECM within the range of 360m. It works the same way as an ECM in counter mode. ^[4]
  
• If a 'Mech has both BAP and ECM installed, the counter ECM feature gets overwritten by ECM. So the 'Mech will only get the increased sensor range, the decreased target info acquisition time and the ability to target unpowered 'Mechs. ^[4]

The in game description doesn't say ether way, so I don't know for sure.

Ive ran my Stalker with a BAP and to me it never seemed to make a difference. There were still plenty of times when a ECM cloaked mech came up behind me and I never even seen them and couldn't lock them because of their ECM. Maybe my BAP was just broken or countering a different mech someplace else or maybe it was just me, I don't know. I just know I don't run one any more because they don't seem to work for me or at least not in my favor.

But any way, that's why I say that the ECM is the Be-All, End-All right now. ECM is a passive blanket cloaking/anti-targeting device which can only really be countered by another ECM, and whichever team has more of it will generally do better.

Cheers

Jax