38 replies to this topic

[Kilo 40]

Pariah Devalis, on 12 March 2015 - 05:44 AM, said:

The truth is I have snuck up on more than a few of these supposed mythical bad LRM pilots, and experience far too few of the good types. Every third drop I can almost expect to see "please hold locks" indicating another mythical beast is on my team. I love seeing proactive missile boats. I do. Hell, the few times I do run LRMs, it is as an intermediate ranged platform with either ample supporting laser systems or at the least a big gun to add some direct fire to the mix while lobbing lurms. They are far more effective, even, but the risk vs reward for LRMs is currently out of whack should one choose to hang back and get lucky with a UAV popping team.

so because you have such an easy time killing bad LRM pilots and you see low ELO players say "hold locks", that means they are kill stealing and raking in easy points?

here, let me say it again..."those who sit in the back lobbing LRMs at max range will get the poor scores that go along with that behavior."

no risk = no reward.

Flash Frame, on 12 March 2015 - 05:53 AM, said:

Indirect fire has proven to be a bit broken and makes it quite difficult to take cover against.

I needed a laugh. thanks.

[Lynx7725]

wanderer, on 12 March 2015 - 06:15 AM, said:

So, basically SRM's -1. Because they'll do more damage, better clustered, and for less tonnage if you slap an SRM in vs. hotloaded LRMs. Hotloading was a crutch to allow LRM-equipped 'Mechs not to be utterly hosed in areas with close environments, like cities: And it also makes the launchers explosive too.

All true. But the way MWO works (as the jokers pointed out, FPS vs. TT), I can suggest all the above and get away with what is essentially extended range SRMs. Previously I think the record holder for maximum potential damage was the 65 ton Cat with the vulnerable ears with 72 points (36 SRMs). Now I can bring 75 tons, 80 tons which can dish 45 to 60 points as a single launch, with more armour and less vulnerability, or 50 tons (Hunch-J) with rapid fire quirks. EDIT: oh, and greater range than SRMs.

Make no mistake about it -- I'm not going to use these to provide long-range support, because that's essentially what those suggestions are about removing. I'm using it to throw more damage downstream in short to mid ranges. Instead of using these as long range weapons, I'm turning them into brawl weapons.

Edited by Lynx7725, 12 March 2015 - 06:24 AM.

[Jetfire]

I think there is a far simpler set of fixes.

IS LRM's
-small reduction in max climb height for shallower descent angle
-capable of only one major flight path correction, fly more like a hellfire missile, not a swarm of cruise missiles.
-maximum turn angle on downward path should be smaller such that movement at 75 kph+ results in significant hit reduction

Clan LRM's
-much shallower flight path

[Egomane]

Jetfire, on 12 March 2015 - 06:43 AM, said:

-maximum turn angle on downward path should be smaller such that movement at 75 kph+ results in significant hit reduction

Which is almost anyone except the biggest assaults. So again, a massive nerf.

[mogs01gt]

Lynx7725, on 12 March 2015 - 06:06 AM, said:

Heh. You are assuming that LRM users don't have brains or don't use them. I used to play Boom Jager builds. I have no problems getting into range to use those -- and I mean close range. Close enough that I can't miss with AC40s. Having a big boomstick like the proposed stuff won't be difficult. Like the mythical Boom Jager, I won't survive too long, but that's irrelevant -- the damage would have been done.

And then clans were created and now jagers are rarely seen or are too glass cannon to do anything.

[Lynx7725]

mogs01gt, on 12 March 2015 - 07:14 AM, said:

And then clans were created and now jagers are rarely seen or are too glass cannon to do anything.

Shrug. I don't know what games you are getting, but I'm still seeing them. Last night I had one friendly Jager follow my Grumpy around and getting into the way, and on the other side there were two Jagers. Missile Boats, Gauss, AC -- I still see them often enough.

I'm not going to assume they don't know how to handle those builds. I treat them with respect and do my best to destroy them before they do that to me. In the same vein, with these changes, I'm going to do my best and use terrain and every trick I know so that I can sidle up next to an enemy and cut loose with as big a volley of "LRMs" as I can muster.

[mogs01gt]

Lynx7725, on 12 March 2015 - 07:28 AM, said:

Shrug. I don't know what games you are getting, but I'm still seeing them. Last night I had one friendly Jager follow my Grumpy around and getting into the way, and on the other side there were two Jagers. Missile Boats, Gauss, AC -- I still see them often enough.

I'm not going to assume they don't know how to handle those builds. I treat them with respect and do my best to destroy them before they do that to me. In the same vein, with these changes, I'm going to do my best and use terrain and every trick I know so that I can sidle up next to an enemy and cut loose with as big a volley of "LRMs" as I can muster.

When I do seem them, they get their ST's blown away in 1 alpha or Im the one blowing way their STs lol. They simply arent tanky enough to face Clan mechs.

I saw an AC5 Jager last night, I cant remember if he had 3 or 4 though, but he was smart! Stayed at range and poked. He know he couldnt brawl with his XL engine which is the biggest downfall of AC40 and dual Gauss jagers.

Edited by mogs01gt, 12 March 2015 - 07:52 AM.

[Strum Wealh]

Lynx7725, on 12 March 2015 - 12:35 AM, said:

Here is what I propose:

• LRMs no longer have Indirect Fire.
  
• LRMs are now restricted to 630m, as per TT rules. And no double-distance like ballistics and energy.
  
• LRM lock times are related to distance, the further away the longer the lock takes. This is to simulate the TT rules of +2 and +4 for shooting at things further away.
  
• LRM lock times are also affected by minimum range, in that it takes longer if the distance is under 180m. Again, this is to represent the aiming difficulty modifiers of the TT.
  
• LRM shake and damage can stay or reduce, I'm ok.
  
• LRM damage stays at 1 damage per missile.
  
• LRM speed need not change.
  
• Oh and ECM can stay. It'd still disrupt locks.

In return, I ask that:

• LRMs do full damage from 0m out to 630m, as per TT.
  
• LRMs are hot-loaded.

See? I only ask for two little things, in exchange for 5 nerfs. I am generous like that.

There are three changes to the proposal that I, personally, would make:

• Retain LRMs' ability to be used for indirect fire, with tracking strength substantially reduced (e.g. by at least ~25%) when used for indirect fire (versus tracking strength remaining at 100% when used for direct fire), in order to emulate the "+1 for indirect fire" modifier from the TT LRM Indirect Fire rules (see pages 111-112 of Total Warfare).
  
• Have the range be 840 meters (LRM Extreme Range; see page 85 of Tactical Operations for Extreme Range rules).
  
• Tie the LRM damage under 180 meters to hot-loading (which was the entire point of hot-loading in the first place; see pages 102-103 of Tactical Operations), and make hot-loading an option (e.g. a checkbox) - one can hot-load their LRMs to bypass the minimum range penalty (at the cost of reduced tracking strength (by at least ~10%) & having the launcher itself explode if it takes a critical hit (much like the Gauss Rifle does)), or not hot-load their LRMs (in which case they behave as they do now, and are subject to delivering nil damage under 180 meters).

Thoughts?

[Kjudoon]

OP LRM "fixes"...



Took me a minute, but now:

Edited by Kjudoon, 12 March 2015 - 08:22 AM.

[Lynx7725]

Kjudoon, on 12 March 2015 - 08:13 AM, said:

OP LRM "fixes"...

You're adaptable, you'll find a way to exploit it.

Besides, it's really a summary of the common proposed "fixes"... give 'em what they want. Take something in trade. Break their heads with the "new and improved".

[krazzyharry]

From one side I can see why some players get angry with LRM boaters. I have had more than one game where a single ECM scout spots me then I am dead by mass LRM fire before I even see the opposing team. I use LRMs...not in LRM60 format, but a couple LRM5s or LRM 15.
The issue is some players seem to have is that when people are trying to exploit the use of a certain weapon or tactic...call it meta-gaming or whatever. Not all of us are not "high end" players and enjoy the game fro what its, a game, not a life style. Some people are going to do whatever it takes to get the supper high damage or kill ratio/ELO. If doing this is a major accomplishment in your life, you might be doing it wrong.

I just can't understand why we adjust one weapon, i.e. the gauss, because payers were complaining about pop-tarters or why ever they changed them but through a fit when other complain about their choice weapon systems. If PGI adjusts the mechanics for LRMs I can see a massive "change it back because I paid money/earned it/played for X long/I'll quit" movement on the forums.
Complain, gripe, scream and yell for or against changes...its still PGI's world and we just play in their sand box. Don't like it? Leave or adjust your tactics.

[Voivode]

Nerf LRMs? They're just about useless as is. Unless you have an odd friend you can drop with who enjoys tagging people from his ECM Spider, I'd count on your LRM boat bombarding the side of a hill and not much else.

[RedDevil]

Some interesting suggestions, but do we need 4 ongoing threads about this?

Are mods able to merge threads?

[Kjudoon]

Lynx7725, on 12 March 2015 - 08:16 AM, said:

You're adaptable, you'll find a way to exploit it.

Besides, it's really a summary of the common proposed "fixes"... give 'em what they want. Take something in trade. Break their heads with the "new and improved".

mmmmm Streak20s with 1000m range. Nope. Cant see ANYTHING going wrong with this.

reddevil, on 12 March 2015 - 08:23 AM, said:

Some interesting suggestions, but do we need 4 ongoing threads about this?

Are mods able to merge threads?

Yes, but the stupid keeps spawning new ones if they are.

[Lynx7725]

Kjudoon, on 12 March 2015 - 08:23 AM, said:

mmmmm Streak20s with 1000m range. Nope. Cant see ANYTHING going wrong with this.

Yup, you're getting the idea. They want to nerf Indirect Fire. Let's give it to them.. for an exchange.

630m, btw.

[Kjudoon]

Can we edit that L off and upgrade to an M while we're at it? Just sod the pretense?

[LordNothing]

i only think that lerms shouldnt have indirect fire out of the box (and upgrades like artemis should allow at least partial indirect fire capability out of the box). however i also think they should be completely un-nerfed in practically every other way.

they are supposed to be a tactical force multiplier when used in addition to effective recon support. indirect fire all the way. lerms should be the backbone of any large group. batteries of lerms sitting behind a wall of heavy and assault assets. anything a recon mech targets should be completely decimated in 5 seconds time. they should be the star of cw, as it stands they are seldom used at all.

when used as a pug weapon it should be utterly worthless as anything but a direct fire weapon. even in direct fire mode they have the added bonus of stun value which most other weapons (except possibly the dakka) do not have. i often use them as shock and awe weapons on mechs like the mad cat, rather than the behind cover weapons most players use em as.

of course what i see is the opposite of that. its the ultimate pug weapon, you seldom see effective recon, and when you do recon the rewards are meager. in cw they are shelved almost exclusively for long range direct fire weapons.

Edited by LordNothing, 12 March 2015 - 08:27 AM.

[Lynx7725]

Kjudoon, on 12 March 2015 - 08:25 AM, said:

Can we edit that L off and upgrade to an M while we're at it? Just sod the pretense?

Well no, we need to hook the suckers... eeh, I mean, in PGI timeline that's still a few years off.. besides, I'd need to keep some room open for MRM40s, after all.

[Mike Forst]

Hello thread.