You do relies that all the Yes votes are from people that use lrm don't you lol.
10
Too Many Lrms?
Started by s0hno, Nov 24 2014 03:10 AM
432 replies to this topic
#102
Posted 26 November 2014 - 08:43 AM
Falkwulf, on 26 November 2014 - 08:30 AM, said:
God how asinine, If you look at the game LRMS are here to stay. Too many chassis are geared to LRM's, Catapault,Stormcrow,Vulture,Kintaro,Trebuchet, then you have the chassis who run LRM's as secondary. Fact is missiles are in game cause they are in canon TT battletech. If you want a mech game with no LRMS then go play Armored Core,Hawken.... OH wait there isnt a mech game without LRMS.
LRMS are a baseline weapon in any mech game. Stop Whining about LRMS being nerfed or done away with. Learn to cope with LRMS, Look at it logically if lrms are taken out of the game then, whats next hummm letts see what people are griping about other than lurms. Letts seee ok letts get rid of gauss rifiles now cause lurms are gone, on to the next weapon thats OP get rid of it, when that is gone then we go for Uac 5's cause they are op get rid of them. Then focus on the lasers. They will be op at that point get rid of em.
Before you know it the only weapon in the game are going to be hummmm...NOTHING. Once you delete all the OP weapons wich all will become op if their balancing factor is removed (IE LRMS duck the heads of Gauss Boats)
In effect leaving us with NOTHING no weapons at all, what are we supposed to do then Play demolition derby crashing our mechs into each other until someone finally dies from crash damage.
Is this what you want??????
look at the big picture before you cry foul, Nerfing one weapon will only make its counterbalance more OP then leads to it being nerfed then leading to another weapons system being OP, in turn gets it nerfed, and so on and so fourth. The NERF MONSTER is NEVER ending, cause if players dont like a system they CRY NERFFFFFFF!!!! until its thier perfered weapon system on the chopping block.
How is PGI supposed to Keep a game going if all the players are crying NERF NERF NERF NERF NERF NERF. Or if players are loosing the weapons they play with most.
Take my ML's and Ill rage quit. Rage Quit= No Profit for Company who produces the game = NO GAME anymore. So go ahead a CRY FOUL,m CRY NERF, and ultimately get the game taken down for lack of player base.
Keep it up your doing a BANG UP JOB forcing this game to go extinct.
LRMS are a baseline weapon in any mech game. Stop Whining about LRMS being nerfed or done away with. Learn to cope with LRMS, Look at it logically if lrms are taken out of the game then, whats next hummm letts see what people are griping about other than lurms. Letts seee ok letts get rid of gauss rifiles now cause lurms are gone, on to the next weapon thats OP get rid of it, when that is gone then we go for Uac 5's cause they are op get rid of them. Then focus on the lasers. They will be op at that point get rid of em.
Before you know it the only weapon in the game are going to be hummmm...NOTHING. Once you delete all the OP weapons wich all will become op if their balancing factor is removed (IE LRMS duck the heads of Gauss Boats)
In effect leaving us with NOTHING no weapons at all, what are we supposed to do then Play demolition derby crashing our mechs into each other until someone finally dies from crash damage.
Is this what you want??????
look at the big picture before you cry foul, Nerfing one weapon will only make its counterbalance more OP then leads to it being nerfed then leading to another weapons system being OP, in turn gets it nerfed, and so on and so fourth. The NERF MONSTER is NEVER ending, cause if players dont like a system they CRY NERFFFFFFF!!!! until its thier perfered weapon system on the chopping block.
How is PGI supposed to Keep a game going if all the players are crying NERF NERF NERF NERF NERF NERF. Or if players are loosing the weapons they play with most.
Take my ML's and Ill rage quit. Rage Quit= No Profit for Company who produces the game = NO GAME anymore. So go ahead a CRY FOUL,m CRY NERF, and ultimately get the game taken down for lack of player base.
Keep it up your doing a BANG UP JOB forcing this game to go extinct.
Right now missiles are a great weapon for people with either low skill, [REDACTED], or for people with older systems, or who play with a very high ping.
However, when it comes to challenges it seems that the amount of missile boats goes from 20% of 'mechs dropped to upwards of 80%.
Why? Because it is EASIER to get good damage numbers and lots of assists with missiles than it is with any other weapon.
What's the "easiest" fix to this?
In short: In challenge calculations DO NOT COUNT the LRM damage, or at the very least, significantly reduce the value of the LRM damage calc.
After all, for probably 90% of that damage a LRM boat inflicts required the assistance of a spotter who for most of the challenges we've had isn't getting ANY bump to his score in helping the LRM boat rack up an easy score. So at a minimum the "score" counted for LRM damage during challenges should be reduced by 50%.
To be more specific:
For challenges missiles should do the same damage they've always done.
The points received towards a challenge score for using missiles should be eliminated, or at the very least, reduced by 50%.
Edited by Mal, 26 November 2014 - 09:34 AM.
Removed unnecessary generalization
#103
-
-
- FP Veteran - Beta 1
- 842 posts
Member
Posted 26 November 2014 - 08:45 AM
Im not voting on this rigged poll why? because it is more the group targeting systems fault than the LRM.s or any other weapon in the game.When players can just press the magic {R} key and the whole team gets the target lock LRM-Weapon spmm is going to happen 90% of the time.
To fix all the weapons spamm in MWO you first need to fix targeting right as in NO!!! group targeting unless a command mech or a scout with a group targeting module is in a battle.
To fix all the weapons spamm in MWO you first need to fix targeting right as in NO!!! group targeting unless a command mech or a scout with a group targeting module is in a battle.
#104
Posted 26 November 2014 - 08:48 AM
Braddack, on 26 November 2014 - 08:32 AM, said:
Okay , read my Post... read it again...and again... okay, now you shoud have gotten the Point of 4 Volleys from 2 Bats, sumary as 8 Volleys, so 8 Times AMS can work...
I never said it destroys, i never said stay 15 min behind Cover, i said, using AMS Lower the incoming Damage and so helps you staying alive.
Shoudnt be that hard to undertsand
I never said it destroys, i never said stay 15 min behind Cover, i said, using AMS Lower the incoming Damage and so helps you staying alive.
Shoudnt be that hard to undertsand
Carrying an AMS
---AND---
Standing near enough to each other to stack their AMS's, over an entire match
That's what you're saying...
You're expecting this to happen in the PUG queue? In a game with no VOIP?
Hell even in the GROUP queue that's a most unreasonable expectation...
Yeah I get that AMS lowers the damage, a bit, but again, AMS is EASILY over powered by a mech sporting just TWO LRM 10's. The AMS is NOT halving the incoming damage, by any means, and even if it were it won't do so for long, UNLESS you're expecting everyone to start carrying 10 tons of AMS ammo...
You can't tell me you think THAT is reasonable...
#105
-
-
- Wrath
- 135 posts
Member
- LocationThe last =FD= Dropship
Posted 26 November 2014 - 08:50 AM
Dimento Graven, on 26 November 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:
I agree, for the most part, missiles ARE where we want them, EXCEPT when it comes to challenges.
Right now missiles are a great weapon for people with either low skill, or some impairment which makes aiming an issue, or for people with older systems, or who play with a very high ping.
However, when it comes to challenges it seems that the amount of missile boats goes from 20% of 'mechs dropped to upwards of 80%.
Why? Because it is EASIER to get good damage numbers and lots of assists with missiles than it is with any other weapon.
What's the "easiest" fix to this?
In short: In challenge calculations DO NOT COUNT the LRM damage, or at the very least, significantly reduce the value of the LRM damage calc.
After all, for probably 90% of that damage a LRM boat inflicts required the assistance of a spotter who for most of the challenges we've had isn't getting ANY bump to his score in helping the LRM boat rack up an easy score. So at a minimum the "score" counted for LRM damage during challenges should be reduced by 50%.
To be more specific:
For challenges missiles should do the same damage they've always done.
The points received towards a challenge score for using missiles should be eliminated, or at the very least, reduced by 50%.
Right now missiles are a great weapon for people with either low skill, or some impairment which makes aiming an issue, or for people with older systems, or who play with a very high ping.
However, when it comes to challenges it seems that the amount of missile boats goes from 20% of 'mechs dropped to upwards of 80%.
Why? Because it is EASIER to get good damage numbers and lots of assists with missiles than it is with any other weapon.
What's the "easiest" fix to this?
In short: In challenge calculations DO NOT COUNT the LRM damage, or at the very least, significantly reduce the value of the LRM damage calc.
After all, for probably 90% of that damage a LRM boat inflicts required the assistance of a spotter who for most of the challenges we've had isn't getting ANY bump to his score in helping the LRM boat rack up an easy score. So at a minimum the "score" counted for LRM damage during challenges should be reduced by 50%.
To be more specific:
For challenges missiles should do the same damage they've always done.
The points received towards a challenge score for using missiles should be eliminated, or at the very least, reduced by 50%.
Too many mechs specialized around LRMS. Catapult,Kintaro. Either one of these negated will cause massive ripples in the way the game is played in tournaments.
Thats like saying Well lurms arent available in tournament, then it will be gauss rifles then lasers then SRMs then Uacs. Before you know it, No weapons will be allowed in tournaments cause without their weapon counterbalance all weapons will be OP at one point or another, when one system is OP it gets NERFED or taken away
#106
Posted 26 November 2014 - 08:50 AM
Superslicks, on 26 November 2014 - 08:42 AM, said:
You do relies that all the Yes votes are from people that use lrm don't you lol.
Why would LRM users vote yes to there being to many LRMs?
I'm a Brawler and vote that there are NOT to many LRMs in the sky. 
#107
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 2,592 posts
Member
- LocationLexington, KY USA
Posted 26 November 2014 - 08:52 AM
Ok, so I went and looked at Dimento's video he linked.
https://www.youtube....d&v=7glx6La-HM0
... and wanted to ask some questions.
Have you LRMed like that since then?
Have you tried to use LRMs on something that isn't an assault?
How often do you die to LRMs?
I ask this because that video is pre clans and looks to be pre 3/3/3/3. You did that much damage with your team having 7 assaults and 5 heavies versus a team with 4 assaults, 4 heavies and 2 each of mediums and lights.
I would ask you to load up a medium with LRMs and try to get somewhere near that damage and kill count and then report back your findings as I think if this is your experience to form an opinion on the matter it may be flawed from a time when several other factors need to be taken into consideration.
https://www.youtube....d&v=7glx6La-HM0
... and wanted to ask some questions.
Have you LRMed like that since then?
Have you tried to use LRMs on something that isn't an assault?
How often do you die to LRMs?
I ask this because that video is pre clans and looks to be pre 3/3/3/3. You did that much damage with your team having 7 assaults and 5 heavies versus a team with 4 assaults, 4 heavies and 2 each of mediums and lights.
I would ask you to load up a medium with LRMs and try to get somewhere near that damage and kill count and then report back your findings as I think if this is your experience to form an opinion on the matter it may be flawed from a time when several other factors need to be taken into consideration.
#108
-
-
- The Ankle Biter
- 1,149 posts
Member
Posted 26 November 2014 - 08:52 AM
Dimento Graven, on 26 November 2014 - 08:48 AM, said:
Well obviously NO MECH can carry 8 AMS's, and that means you expect at least 8 of 12 'mechs to be:
Carrying an AMS
---AND---
Standing near enough to each other to stack their AMS's, over an entire match
That's what you're saying...
You're expecting this to happen in the PUG queue? In a game with no VOIP?
Hell even in the GROUP queue that's a most unreasonable expectation...
Yeah I get that AMS lowers the damage, a bit, but again, AMS is EASILY over powered by a mech sporting just TWO LRM 10's. The AMS is NOT halving the incoming damage, by any means, and even if it were it won't do so for long, UNLESS you're expecting everyone to start carrying 10 tons of AMS ammo...
You can't tell me you think THAT is reasonable...
Carrying an AMS
---AND---
Standing near enough to each other to stack their AMS's, over an entire match
That's what you're saying...
You're expecting this to happen in the PUG queue? In a game with no VOIP?
Hell even in the GROUP queue that's a most unreasonable expectation...
Yeah I get that AMS lowers the damage, a bit, but again, AMS is EASILY over powered by a mech sporting just TWO LRM 10's. The AMS is NOT halving the incoming damage, by any means, and even if it were it won't do so for long, UNLESS you're expecting everyone to start carrying 10 tons of AMS ammo...
You can't tell me you think THAT is reasonable...
i see you love to missunderstand People.
If i had an Thing who making an large Laser fire dont hit at 8 but mabye at 6 Damage per Hit i am sure that woud be viable.
having AMS does that with Missles.
Sry to say, but negating Damage is always reasonable.
Edited by Braddack, 26 November 2014 - 08:55 AM.
#109
-
-
- The Nimble
- 5,136 posts
Member
- LocationPlymouth, MN
Posted 26 November 2014 - 08:55 AM
Dimento Graven, on 26 November 2014 - 08:25 AM, said:
Except, you actually have to AIM lasers.
LRMs, you just point in a general direction...
I call BS on that, no one would be this passionate about a weapon system if they weren't using it.
No, you're a LRM boater, maybe a 'closet' LRM boater, your secret shame, but yeah, you're a LRM boater absolutely.
LRMs, you just point in a general direction...
I call BS on that, no one would be this passionate about a weapon system if they weren't using it.
No, you're a LRM boater, maybe a 'closet' LRM boater, your secret shame, but yeah, you're a LRM boater absolutely.
Description of Circumstantial Ad Hominem
A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy in which one attempts to attack a claim by asserting that the person making the claim is making it simply out of self interest. In some cases, this fallacy involves substituting an attack on a person's circumstances (such as the person's religion, political affiliation, ethnic background, etc.). The fallacy has the following forms:
Person A makes claim X.
Person B asserts that A makes claim X because it is in A's interest to claim X.
Therefore claim X is false.
Person A makes claim X.
Person B makes an attack on A's circumstances.
Therefore X is false.
A Circumstantial ad Hominem is a fallacy because a person's interests and circumstances have no bearing on the truth or falsity of the claim being made. While a person's interests will provide them with motives to support certain claims, the claims stand or fall on their own. It is also the case that a person's circumstances (religion, political affiliation, etc.) do not affect the truth or falsity of the claim. This is made quite clear by the following example: "Bill claims that 1+1=2. But he is a Republican, so his claim is false."
There are times when it is prudent to suspicious of a person's claims, such as when it is evident that the claims are being biased by the person's interests. For example, if a tobacco company representative claims that tobacco does not cause cancer, it would be prudent to not simply accept the claim. This is because the person has a motivation to make the claim, whether it is true or not. However, the mere fact that the person has a motivation to make the claim does not make it false. For example, suppose a parent tells her son that sticking a fork in a light socket would be dangerous. Simply because she has a motivation to say this obviously does not make her claim false.
Dimento Graven, on 26 November 2014 - 08:31 AM, said:
ONLY IF, you happen to be carrying Rader Depravation, OR, the enemy doesn't have a UAV up, OR another enemy from a different location isn't looking at you, OR if you haven't been narc'd, OR if you haven't been TAG'd, then yeah under those particular circumstances the missiles will lose lock and you'll probably not be hit by them.
Don't have Radar Dep(found it a waste of money since it is SO easy to avoid getting hit by LRMs), shoot down UAVs, situational awareness not only notices UAVs but also enemies behind you, rarely get NARC'd and when I do I find locations that do block missiles or friendly ECM to take care of it, TAG means I can shoot the mech TAGging me and I do.
Again... I can avoid LRMs.
Why is it SO hard for you?
You know the answer.....
http://en.wikipedia....93Kruger_effect
#110
-
-
- Shredder
- 265 posts
Member
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:00 AM
I have the same average damage with my LRM based JM6-A (3ALRM15) as my autocannon based JM6-S builds (2x10 or 3x5), with more kills per game with the JM6-S builds. Missiles are in a generally good place now. I have to work hard with positioning and TAG to get much over 250-300 dmg in the JM6-A unless the opposition is really bad.
The one thing that should change is the screen shake amount for low numbers of missiles or the clan missile stream. As it stands right now it really messes up framerate and creates a much bigger issue to the target than the actual damage. Other than that the LRMs add good variety to the game.
The one thing that should change is the screen shake amount for low numbers of missiles or the clan missile stream. As it stands right now it really messes up framerate and creates a much bigger issue to the target than the actual damage. Other than that the LRMs add good variety to the game.
#111
-
-
- The Ankle Biter
- 1,149 posts
Member
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:02 AM
BigFatGator, on 26 November 2014 - 09:00 AM, said:
I have the same average damage with my LRM based JM6-A (3ALRM15) as my autocannon based JM6-S builds (2x10 or 3x5), with more kills per game with the JM6-S builds. Missiles are in a generally good place now. I have to work hard with positioning and TAG to get much over 250-300 dmg in the JM6-A unless the opposition is really bad.
The one thing that should change is the screen shake amount for low numbers of missiles or the clan missile stream. As it stands right now it really messes up framerate and creates a much bigger issue to the target than the actual damage. Other than that the LRMs add good variety to the game.
The one thing that should change is the screen shake amount for low numbers of missiles or the clan missile stream. As it stands right now it really messes up framerate and creates a much bigger issue to the target than the actual damage. Other than that the LRMs add good variety to the game.
Nononono i want my screenshake
in my Vindicator the main Weapon is Psychologial Nature.
Firing an LRM 5 isnt much Damage, but the "incomming Missle " and the screenshake helps my Team alot
#112
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:08 AM
Barantor, on 26 November 2014 - 08:33 AM, said:
Eh, not general direction, you have to keep them lit the entire flight path or they will deviate from course. Unless you are an idiot you also have to know the map fairly well so that you don't send volley after volley into a rock or mountain or building.
I know how to use missiles, and it ain't that hard (go back and see my vid where I EASILY rack up 8 kills with my LRM boat).
Quote
You also have to move, unless you are in the herd of your team, which does happen sometimes in pug games and makes LRMing even easier.
Not.
Quote
Basic LRMing is easy, when you have a big mech with 1k missiles, it is easy to get kills because you can afford to waste ammo, just send volley after volley into one mech that the brawlers are already taking on.
More advanced LRMing happens at the level where you don't have the weight or room to take more ammo and have to make sure every missile hits. It doesn't get talked about on here much, because everyone is thinking about those dummies with stalkers lined with missiles sitting in the back with ecm cover just blurping all their ammo at whatever lights up.
You see fewer mediums and lights use LRMs (clans aside, that puma has to i guess) than you do the wasted space of assaults with thousands of rounds of ammo.
More advanced LRMing happens at the level where you don't have the weight or room to take more ammo and have to make sure every missile hits. It doesn't get talked about on here much, because everyone is thinking about those dummies with stalkers lined with missiles sitting in the back with ecm cover just blurping all their ammo at whatever lights up.
You see fewer mediums and lights use LRMs (clans aside, that puma has to i guess) than you do the wasted space of assaults with thousands of rounds of ammo.
Adv LRM'ing means holding off firing your LRMs until you have lots of red on the enemy target. There's no f'ing way to do anything else other than that. You sure as heck can't "aim" where the missiles hit on the 'mech and if it were possible, maybe I'd feel differently about them, the fact is all you need to do for missiles is wait until you have a lock, pull the trigger, keep pointing in the general direction of the target, and the missiles will pretty much hit your target.
Hell, even if you lose lock, as long as you regain it before the missiles land, the missiles will AUTOMAGICALLY correct and still probably hit the target. In fact, this is one of those "adv." tactics, purposely lose lock, let them drift, then regain lock to have the missiles hit from another angle.
Quote
At it's base, pointing and clicking is what this game is about. It is the piloting, positioning and paying attention that separates the good pilots from the bad, not just the gunnery. I've seen terrible gunners find the best locations to shoot from on an enemy and rack up kills because they could put round after round out.
Which is fine under normal circumstances.
The problem is during challenges, where everyone defaults to the EASIEST mode possible for racking up points, which is to pilot a missile boat.
If it wasn't the easiest mode possible, the missile boat percentage wouldn't jump to 80% of 'mechs dropped during challenges.
It's NOT the most fun way to play, which is why AFTER challenges, the percentage of missile boats seen drops back down to about 20% of 'mechs dropped.
So something needs to be done about how the challenges are scored, NOT in how the LRM damage is calculated, but the challenge score calculated FROM that damage.
Quote
Part of the reason I don't like this games scoring system is because the damage seems to be kinda the number folks go to. A good gunnery or pilot of a mech won't have high numbers, he will have low numbers and kills.
LRM blurpers think they are doing good when they get 1k+ damage with LRMs. Taking off arms of banshee 3Ms that have nothing in them doesn't help kill the mech as well as 3 hits in the back with 2x ac10s, or even 4 volleys of lrm5s direct fired with artemis from the rear.
LRM blurpers think they are doing good when they get 1k+ damage with LRMs. Taking off arms of banshee 3Ms that have nothing in them doesn't help kill the mech as well as 3 hits in the back with 2x ac10s, or even 4 volleys of lrm5s direct fired with artemis from the rear.
Usually true. When I get a few headshot kills in a match I'll have low damage but lots of kills.
Quote
If LRMs are to change though, it would have to be in conjunction with many other systems and changes like C3 being a requirement to target friendlies targets and ECM becoming what it was lore wise. I don't think those are going to change so I'm fine with the way that LRMs are now.
I guess we will see how well LRMs do in CW next month? Tournaments are one thing, but CW to me is the real deal.
I guess we will see how well LRMs do in CW next month? Tournaments are one thing, but CW to me is the real deal.
#113
-
-
- 839 posts
Member
- LocationUnited States
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:08 AM
While I think the OP means well, it's really silly to have a Yes/No/Sometimes Poll with a follow up question that assumes the first polls results.
Also, for the second question, it was lacking a "none of the above" choice for those who do not feel they are over-used.
Anyway, while I don't think there's too many lrms, and I don't think they're over-used, it wouldn't hurt to clean up LOS mechanics. I'd recommend someone else's suggestion of integrating C3 into Targeting Computers and perhaps some kind of IS equivalent mechanic with Command Module which allows people with C3 Master/Slave in game to share targeting data.
Also, for the second question, it was lacking a "none of the above" choice for those who do not feel they are over-used.
Anyway, while I don't think there's too many lrms, and I don't think they're over-used, it wouldn't hurt to clean up LOS mechanics. I'd recommend someone else's suggestion of integrating C3 into Targeting Computers and perhaps some kind of IS equivalent mechanic with Command Module which allows people with C3 Master/Slave in game to share targeting data.
Edited by AlphaToaster, 26 November 2014 - 09:09 AM.
#114
-
-
- Philanthropist
- 4,480 posts
Member
- LocationSweden
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:12 AM
I don't think there are too much LRMs, if anything they need a slight buff.
I do like the idea of rewards for ams protection, but only when you are protecting a teammate. I want this not because LRMs are a problem but because ams is underused.
I would also like a reduction in bap range and make targeting enemies much harder in general. Again not because LRMs are a problem but because there currently isn't enough challenge and specialization to the information war.
So those are both good ideas, but would have to be coupled with a significant buff to LRMs because LRMs should definitely not be made even weaker.
I do like the idea of rewards for ams protection, but only when you are protecting a teammate. I want this not because LRMs are a problem but because ams is underused.
I would also like a reduction in bap range and make targeting enemies much harder in general. Again not because LRMs are a problem but because there currently isn't enough challenge and specialization to the information war.
So those are both good ideas, but would have to be coupled with a significant buff to LRMs because LRMs should definitely not be made even weaker.
#115
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:18 AM
Mercules, on 26 November 2014 - 08:55 AM, said:
Description of Circumstantial Ad Hominem
...
...
Yeah... Whatever...
Quote
Don't have Radar Dep(found it a waste of money since it is SO easy to avoid getting hit by LRMs), shoot down UAVs, situational awareness not only notices UAVs but also enemies behind you, rarely get NARC'd and when I do I find locations that do block missiles or friendly ECM to take care of it, TAG means I can shoot the mech TAGging me and I do.
Again... I can avoid LRMs.
Why is it SO hard for you?
You know the answer.....
http://en.wikipedia....93Kruger_effect
Again... I can avoid LRMs.
Why is it SO hard for you?
You know the answer.....
http://en.wikipedia....93Kruger_effect
Wow! EVERYONE ELSE sucks but you.
Ok fine, so you're either a missile boat pilot, trying desperately to maintain your damn near free ride during the challenges...
OR
You're piloting a light 'mech at 150+ kph, where most missiles tracking you can be made to miss with sudden course changes.
What ever. Your implications that it's "easy" and anyone who has issues with it "must be doing something wrong" or are "unskilled" just makes you seem arrogant, actually arrogantly ignorant.
My original point in this thread still stands:
The value of missiles in challenges should be eliminated, or at the very least, reduced when it comes to challenge scoring.
If missiles weren't easy mode, the population of missile boats would not jump from ~20% to ~80% during challenges.
#116
-
-
- Bridesmaid
- 2,188 posts
Member
- LocationKnee deep in mechdrek
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:21 AM
Mr Huge, on 24 November 2014 - 12:25 PM, said:
LRMs are a problem, mainly due to the combination of quirks which have given LRM boats a whole new steroid injection and the ECM nerfs. We now see Light- and fast Medium wolfpacks whose only job appears to be locking up single targets toward the edge of the enemy group, and then never letting the locks go and permanently spotting **** exposed mechs ***** for harassment and destruction in detail. Nerfing the damage of the missiles or re-boosting ECM though, are both bad ideas. If we have no LRM damage potential, we have no counter to the Assault roflstomp, and if ECM is re-boosted then we'll just get D-DC hugbears and steamrolls all over again.
My vote goes toward either improving AMS, lowering LRM rates of fire, or both. I have also earlier proposed that PPCs could be given the ability to disrupt locking mechanics and/or disrupting sensor range, which would create a skill-based mechanic for countering missile boats, since PPCs do take a bit of skill to use effectively and since the effective ranges of the weapons kinda coincide.
My vote goes toward either improving AMS, lowering LRM rates of fire, or both. I have also earlier proposed that PPCs could be given the ability to disrupt locking mechanics and/or disrupting sensor range, which would create a skill-based mechanic for countering missile boats, since PPCs do take a bit of skill to use effectively and since the effective ranges of the weapons kinda coincide.
Welll there's your problem.
Happy to help.
#117
-
-
- Ace Of Spades
- 1,690 posts
Member
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:22 AM
Here's the thing: I don't think that LRM's are necessarily massively OP on their own. Even when they're boated in large numbers they can be countered. The problem, I think, is more that the requisite one-dimensional response necessary to beat such a team, and the heavy reliance on what many consider to be a problematic mechanic (ECM) creates a gameplay experience that's absolutely not fun to many players. And, personally, I can understand why. It's not so much the damage, it's the fact that with enough missiles, you're rendered completely blind. It also allows more damage to be piled onto a mech that's already engaged, compounding the effectiveness of massed fire because LoS isn't required. And, yes, even if the individual numbers aren't amazing, it can completely change the enemy's behavior.
Also, the problem is compounded in PUG matches because you're less likely to convince your team to do ANYTHING in a coordinated fashion, much less make an aggressive push, so you're relegated to either being lucky to have ECM coverage, hope you have LRM's of your own, or hope that sniper fire can even the odds a bit.
People who argue LRM's are terrible should be taken with a grain of salt. Either they're exaggerating because they don't want to see their favorite weapon nerfed, or else they don't understand that personal damage isn't as much of a factor as team synergy, denying players the ability to set up coherent firing lines, and supportive which can turn a stalemated brawl into a rout.
That said, I don't have a "good" solution. Maybe if ECM were adjusted so it wasn't so powerful we could discuss changes, but as things stand, what we don't need to do is nerf the weapon until nobody ever carries it. Currently, it IS being used as a suppressive weapon, which I think can be a positive mechanic when it's not overdone. Take too much potential damage away and you lose that. And there ARE counters for it which can render their use much less problematic.
Also, the problem is compounded in PUG matches because you're less likely to convince your team to do ANYTHING in a coordinated fashion, much less make an aggressive push, so you're relegated to either being lucky to have ECM coverage, hope you have LRM's of your own, or hope that sniper fire can even the odds a bit.
People who argue LRM's are terrible should be taken with a grain of salt. Either they're exaggerating because they don't want to see their favorite weapon nerfed, or else they don't understand that personal damage isn't as much of a factor as team synergy, denying players the ability to set up coherent firing lines, and supportive which can turn a stalemated brawl into a rout.
That said, I don't have a "good" solution. Maybe if ECM were adjusted so it wasn't so powerful we could discuss changes, but as things stand, what we don't need to do is nerf the weapon until nobody ever carries it. Currently, it IS being used as a suppressive weapon, which I think can be a positive mechanic when it's not overdone. Take too much potential damage away and you lose that. And there ARE counters for it which can render their use much less problematic.
Edited by Gallowglas, 26 November 2014 - 09:27 AM.
#118
-
-
- Elite Founder
- 2,592 posts
Member
- LocationLexington, KY USA
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:23 AM
Dimento Graven, on 26 November 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:
Yeah, keep the center of the circle inside the box during the entire flight.
I know how to use missiles, and it ain't that hard (go back and see my vid where I EASILY rack up 8 kills with my LRM boat).
Yes, moving while keeping that circle in the big box is OH SO HARD...
Not.
I know how to use missiles, and it ain't that hard (go back and see my vid where I EASILY rack up 8 kills with my LRM boat).
Yes, moving while keeping that circle in the big box is OH SO HARD...
Not.
Watched your old video from long ago, posted above about it. As far as 'so hard'? It isn't much harder than getting in a brawl and hitting side torsos, pinpoint alpha strikes into specific parts isn't awfully hard either. The hardest type of fight in this game is the long distance direct fire one as far as gunnery/aiming skills.
My comments were more about making every missile count, which you didn't in your bloated stalker either?
Dimento Graven, on 26 November 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:
Wow... "basic" vs. "advanced"... You probably are serious about this, I will not respond to any perceived pretension in that, but the difference in "basic" vs. "adv" LRM'ing is minimal, and is actually just timing.
Adv LRM'ing means holding off firing your LRMs until you have lots of red on the enemy target. There's no f'ing way to do anything else other than that. You sure as heck can't "aim" where the missiles hit on the 'mech and if it were possible, maybe I'd feel differently about them, the fact is all you need to do for missiles is wait until you have a lock, pull the trigger, keep pointing in the general direction of the target, and the missiles will pretty much hit your target.
Hell, even if you lose lock, as long as you regain it before the missiles land, the missiles will AUTOMAGICALLY correct and still probably hit the target. In fact, this is one of those "adv." tactics, purposely lose lock, let them drift, then regain lock to have the missiles hit from another angle.
Except that with missiles, unlike all the other weapon systems, you can "point and click" and NEVER be in sight of your enemy.
Adv LRM'ing means holding off firing your LRMs until you have lots of red on the enemy target. There's no f'ing way to do anything else other than that. You sure as heck can't "aim" where the missiles hit on the 'mech and if it were possible, maybe I'd feel differently about them, the fact is all you need to do for missiles is wait until you have a lock, pull the trigger, keep pointing in the general direction of the target, and the missiles will pretty much hit your target.
Hell, even if you lose lock, as long as you regain it before the missiles land, the missiles will AUTOMAGICALLY correct and still probably hit the target. In fact, this is one of those "adv." tactics, purposely lose lock, let them drift, then regain lock to have the missiles hit from another angle.
Except that with missiles, unlike all the other weapon systems, you can "point and click" and NEVER be in sight of your enemy.
Except you can determine where the missiles will hit in a general sense the same way as an LBX is shot. I know which arc of the mech the missiles will hit. If I fire a volley of missiles at a mech facing me, it will mostly hit his front armors and arms, not usually his legs.
If I fire at a mech facing away from me, it will hit mostly his back armors. Makes sense.
If he is running directly away from me, I will hit back armors and legs, depending on his speed.
If I get a lock, fire, lose lock but his movement is sideways from my facing, I can get back hits if I reacquire lock (this is in fact how you kill one of the awesomes in your video).
Also in your video, when you get better hits you were using tag and within sight of the enemy. It is not much different than sniping at someone who isn't aimed at you, but because of the lock factor, you seem to put this in a different category. I do not.
Dimento Graven, on 26 November 2014 - 09:08 AM, said:
Which is fine under normal circumstances.
The problem is during challenges, where everyone defaults to the EASIEST mode possible for racking up points, which is to pilot a missile boat.
If it wasn't the easiest mode possible, the missile boat percentage wouldn't jump to 80% of 'mechs dropped during challenges.
It's NOT the most fun way to play, which is why AFTER challenges, the percentage of missile boats seen drops back down to about 20% of 'mechs dropped.
So something needs to be done about how the challenges are scored, NOT in how the LRM damage is calculated, but the challenge score calculated FROM that damage.
I think you mean, he'll have low damage, high kills.
Usually true. When I get a few headshot kills in a match I'll have low damage but lots of kills.
Again, LRMs are working well, it's just these challenges and how they are scored that needs to be reworked.
The problem is during challenges, where everyone defaults to the EASIEST mode possible for racking up points, which is to pilot a missile boat.
If it wasn't the easiest mode possible, the missile boat percentage wouldn't jump to 80% of 'mechs dropped during challenges.
It's NOT the most fun way to play, which is why AFTER challenges, the percentage of missile boats seen drops back down to about 20% of 'mechs dropped.
So something needs to be done about how the challenges are scored, NOT in how the LRM damage is calculated, but the challenge score calculated FROM that damage.
I think you mean, he'll have low damage, high kills.
Usually true. When I get a few headshot kills in a match I'll have low damage but lots of kills.
Again, LRMs are working well, it's just these challenges and how they are scored that needs to be reworked.
I found that the folks using LRMs weren't as consistent as the ones not using LRMs. I started off using them myself but got very inconsistent results. The assist part of the challenge was definitely easier with LRMs, but the staying alive portion if JUST using LRMs was a bit more tricky for some. Most of the time I got my kills from either luck with a volley when the mech was almost down, or going in with lasers to finish them myself.
Changed to a 5SS and finished the challenge a lot faster since I played normally and would run down those that cowered in fear from me (easy since part of the challenge was staying alive).
When I say "advanced" LRMing I'm not talking about some ancient chinese art of LRM, but just the practical sense of how they work and to get the most out of them. Any dummy can lock and hit the button, I'm not disputing that, but to get really good with them you have to know to flank, position, and arc them in a manner that benefits their damage potential the most.
Your video, as much as I don't think it helps your argument, does show me that you have the knowledge of position and timing which helps a lot with any weapon system. With that and a little map knowledge you can be better at LRMs than "joe dirt" that just blurps volley after volley into the mountainside.
#119
-
-
- Overlord
- 995 posts
Member
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:36 AM
Dimento Graven, on 26 November 2014 - 08:43 AM, said:
I agree, for the most part, missiles ARE where we want them, EXCEPT when it comes to challenges.
Right now missiles are a great weapon for people with either low skill, [REDACTED], or for people with older systems, or who play with a very high ping.
.
Right now missiles are a great weapon for people with either low skill, [REDACTED], or for people with older systems, or who play with a very high ping.
.
Or, people who like to play a support role, or don't like brawling, or have a different play style. Lots of reasons for people to use LRMs, which don't necessarily revolve around player skill (or, perceptions of player skill).
edit: Your poll is biased, and I can't participate. The second question doesn't provide a response to go with a "No" answer to the first question. If someone doesn't think LRMs are over used, none of the options on that second poll would be necessary, in their opinion.
Edited by Mal, 26 November 2014 - 09:39 AM.
#120
Posted 26 November 2014 - 09:38 AM
Barantor, on 26 November 2014 - 09:23 AM, said:
Watched your old video from long ago, posted above about it. As far as 'so hard'? It isn't much harder than getting in a brawl and hitting side torsos, pinpoint alpha strikes into specific parts isn't awfully hard either. The hardest type of fight in this game is the long distance direct fire one as far as gunnery/aiming skills.
Quote
My comments were more about making every missile count, which you didn't in your bloated stalker either?
Quote
Except you can determine where the missiles will hit in a general sense the same way as an LBX is shot. I know which arc of the mech the missiles will hit. If I fire a volley of missiles at a mech facing me, it will mostly hit his front armors and arms, not usually his legs.
If I fire at a mech facing away from me, it will hit mostly his back armors. Makes sense.
If he is running directly away from me, I will hit back armors and legs, depending on his speed.
If I get a lock, fire, lose lock but his movement is sideways from my facing, I can get back hits if I reacquire lock (this is in fact how you kill one of the awesomes in your video).
If I fire at a mech facing away from me, it will hit mostly his back armors. Makes sense.
If he is running directly away from me, I will hit back armors and legs, depending on his speed.
If I get a lock, fire, lose lock but his movement is sideways from my facing, I can get back hits if I reacquire lock (this is in fact how you kill one of the awesomes in your video).
During challenges, because of how easy it is to rack up the challenge points, the number of missile boats jumps to about 80% of 'mechs dropped.
Quote
Also in your video, when you get better hits you were using tag and within sight of the enemy. It is not much different than sniping at someone who isn't aimed at you, but because of the lock factor, you seem to put this in a different category. I do not.
I'm sorry, but comparing ANY aspect of missile boating to sniping is like comparing driving a Pinto to piloting the Space Shuttle.
Worlds apart.
Trust me, I know, my preferred 'mechs are dual gauss snipers and I have been steadily working my way to the Guillotine achievement.
So I know EXACTLY the difference in skill level it takes to hit a 'mech with computer guided missiles at 1000 meters, as opposed to pin point aiming at moving enemy's weak spot from a 1000 meters.
The levels of skill required are miles apart.
Quote
I found that the folks using LRMs weren't as consistent as the ones not using LRMs. I started off using them myself but got very inconsistent results. The assist part of the challenge was definitely easier with LRMs, but the staying alive portion if JUST using LRMs was a bit more tricky for some. Most of the time I got my kills from either luck with a volley when the mech was almost down, or going in with lasers to finish them myself.
Changed to a 5SS and finished the challenge a lot faster since I played normally and would run down those that cowered in fear from me (easy since part of the challenge was staying alive).
When I say "advanced" LRMing I'm not talking about some ancient chinese art of LRM, but just the practical sense of how they work and to get the most out of them. Any dummy can lock and hit the button, I'm not disputing that, but to get really good with them you have to know to flank, position, and arc them in a manner that benefits their damage potential the most.
Your video, as much as I don't think it helps your argument, does show me that you have the knowledge of position and timing which helps a lot with any weapon system. With that and a little map knowledge you can be better at LRMs than "joe dirt" that just blurps volley after volley into the mountainside.
Changed to a 5SS and finished the challenge a lot faster since I played normally and would run down those that cowered in fear from me (easy since part of the challenge was staying alive).
When I say "advanced" LRMing I'm not talking about some ancient chinese art of LRM, but just the practical sense of how they work and to get the most out of them. Any dummy can lock and hit the button, I'm not disputing that, but to get really good with them you have to know to flank, position, and arc them in a manner that benefits their damage potential the most.
Your video, as much as I don't think it helps your argument, does show me that you have the knowledge of position and timing which helps a lot with any weapon system. With that and a little map knowledge you can be better at LRMs than "joe dirt" that just blurps volley after volley into the mountainside.
Yes, there are ways to use missiles more efficiently and for the most part "adv. LRM'ing" is not beyond the skill level of most MWO players, BUT, "adv. LRM'ing" being comparable to being an "adv. sniper"? Not hardly.
The level of skill required for "adv LRM'ing" is no where near the level of skill required for even "adequate" sniping.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users
