Drunken Skull, on 26 July 2015 - 01:04 AM, said:
As for the Racks being explosive, I thought this was already the case. AFAIK It's the reason the Catapult has Doors on it's launchers, effectively, when the launcher has it's it's door open, it has it's internal structure directly exposed, bypassing any armour in that section of the mech.
As for the score of the Hbk, I think you will find that this is due to the QUIRKS Applied to that mech, and has nothing to do with the performance of LRM in general.
You are wrong about the weapon door mechanics, and right about the Hunchback performance. Open doors have no negative effect. When closed, however, that section of the 'Mech only 90% of any incoming damage gets applied. It's why I miss the Centurion's old missile racks. Well, that and because they looked much cooler as well.
Drunken Skull, on 26 July 2015 - 01:37 AM, said:
I think a more feasible solution would be to drastically increase the spread of indirect fire LRM so that fewer missiles have a direct hit, essentially turning it into a low-damage Area-Of-Effect weapon when used on an indirect target.
Wha-a-a-a-aaaaat? No. No no no noNOOO. The only reason people feel a need to boat LRMs is because of how
INefficient they already are. Using one or two launchers is almost universally considered to be a poor build decision(not that I agree). That's why they get boated - you have to take forty or more LRMs for them to be worth anything as a primary weapon system.
Making them even more inefficient than they already are will just increase the amount of LRMs needed to be effective. And that will make single- or dual-LRM launcher 'Mechs even more of a rarity. Literally the only 'Mechs you'll see with LRMs will be boats. Have you read
this thread? Or seen this picture(from a different thread)?
Catalina Steiner, on 29 April 2015 - 09:12 AM, said:
Notice the spread on the LRM-20 quadrant. It covers more area than the Awesome's entire body, and the Awesome has one of the largest frontal profiles of any 'Mech in the entire game. AND, that's
WITH Artemis. That's an LRM-20
after being modified to cluster more tightly, and
with a line-of-sight to the target for the duration of the missiles' flight(Artemis does not do anything to missiles fired indirectly)
The LRM-15 with Artemis is already pretty bad, and the LRM-20 looks like it gets even fewer hits than the -15 does. I don't mean fewer hits per launch, I mean fewer hits
overall. That's insane. It means there is literally no reason at all to take an LRM-20, even with Artemis. You will cause
less damage with the
bigger launcher!
And that's why we have LRM boats. Not because the LRM is so good, but because it is
so bad that you have to boat it in order to get any real, consistently reliable use out of it. Making the spread worse will only make non-boated LRMs virtually extinct. The boats will still be around, though, because the basic cause for their existence will not only still be present, but will have actually become
amplified.
If you want to make LRMs a good weapon choice, but remove their boating appeal, you have to make them better weapons individually, but give them drawbacks that directly affect boating itself. Make them more effective for engaging a single enemy. Make them capable of being used even without a target lock. Give them drastically higher velocity, somewhat better clustering OR slightly higher damage. This would allow you to shoot targets 400-600 meters away, even without a lock, somewhat reliably.
This, IMO, is something critically missing from MWO's implementation of LRMs. They're not really "long-range" at all. Not only do the majority of larger weapons out-range LRMs due to having double-range values, they do so more accurately and efficiently. An LRM 'Mech can only lock on to faraway targets rarely himself, whether due to ECM or them taking cover - and trying to dumb-fire LRMs at an enemy beyond 300m is completely pointless due to how slowly they fly, unless said enemy is
completely oblivious. This toon makes boating worse, because LRM users have learned to rely on teammates to do their spotting for them. If the teammates are up front spotting, you can afford to devote less of your build to defense, and instead just load up on LRMs until you're little more than a walking missile turret.
To offset their newfound effectiveness due to velocity and damage buffs, you just lower LRM reloading speeds.
DRASTICALLY. Say, three times what it is currently. So now the LRM-10 fires far less often, but when it does fire, it actually hits fast and hard. Which is the way it should be; the AC/10, PPC, and LRM-10 were
supposed to be roughly analogous in TT. Each weapon had its advantages and disadvantages; AC/10 was low heat but high weight, PPC was high heat but good range and moderate weight(due to no ammo required), and LRM-10 was kind of in the middle - moderate weight, low heat, great range, but with a massive minimum range penalty as well as damage being spread over the target.
Anyone can see that this is not the case in MWO - the LRM-10 is
significantly inferior to both of those weapons. That's just bad balancing. The LRM-10 should be more powerful compared to the AC/10 and PPC, but it should also have its boatability reduced. Increasing reload time is the most obvious way to reduce their boating appeal.
You could even give all LRM launcher sizes a single reload time value, if you implemented a progressive lock system. Lock on the target for one second, five of your LRMs per launcher will track. Keep the lock for two seconds, ten of your LRMs per launcher will track. Etc. So there'd still be an inherent advantage to using four LRM-5s instead of a single LRM-20 - you get to lock all twenty of your missiles (four launchers at five missiles each) four times faster. Of course, if you take the -20, you still have three more hardpoints in which to mount SRMs, Streaks, or a Narc. So each configuration has
natural, inherent advantages and disadvantages, without having to mess with DPS or heat values or anything of the sort.
If tripling the reload time still isn't enough to keep LRM launchers from being OP, resort to exaggerating the ghost heat mechanics. I'm not fond of this solution in most cases, which is why I mention it at the end. It really should be a last resort. Implementing weapon mechanics that balance each out naturally and inherently is a much more elegant solution.
Gorgo7, on 26 July 2015 - 05:51 AM, said:
It seems that you have no idea how to avoid the forum at all...and I wish you would.
You tell 'im, Gorgo!
Whoops, on 26 July 2015 - 09:29 AM, said:
Only problem I could see with an active/passive, is that passive would have to be either a tiny buff, or have some serious downsides to using it. Such as: no target lockon info, no shared target feeds, etc. Otherwise it'll be a null-choice and people will almost always use passive because active has no real benefit compared to "hey, free ecm for everyone
" (probably not -that- strong, but a step towards it none-the-less.)
Could be interesting if they put in a whole infomation system like we were promised, though! (also should probably make UAV's into an item carried on the mech, with a hard limit, if this system comes into play.)
I don't see that as a problem at all. Guess it's just me, but I see it as an opportunity... .and I wish/hope PGI could see it the same way. The most basic, commonly-used method is to have Passive only detect 'Mechs that have their sensors on Active, while Active shows all 'Mechs within sensor range. That seems like it might make Active sensors a bit too powerful in MWO, though.
So maybe instead, you could have "Narrow-band vs. Broad-band" sensors instead of Passive vs. Active. A quick thought exercise, just off the top of my head here...
"Narrow-band" only lets your sensors pick up one target at a time. Point your reticle over an enemy, press R, your sensors are now tracking him. Other enemies do not show up on your sensors at all, unless you target them instead.. You can only track
one enemy at a time. Allies can see and track your target as well. So, target sharing remains the way we have it now, but target DETECTION is drastically reduced - you don't detect anything automatically, you have to do a visual lock and selection.
Also, you could implement a narrowed sensor cone for this mode. Instead of being able to target anything within the 90º arc in front of you, make it a much smaller arc, displayed by a thinly-outlined circle on your HUD - something like 20º or 30º. You can only track targets within this arc. Maybe increase the range of your sensors within the arc to compensate for how little wiggle room you get for tracking your target. Also, give a boost to target info gathering since you are devoting your sensor suite entirely to that one target within a very small cone of effect.
"Broad-band," on the other hand, would detect and share targets similar to the way the UAV currently does in MWO - it shows you where the 'Mechs are, what the 'Mechs are, and what percentage of health they have left, but you get
no paper doll info. Position, direction, identification, and (maybe) overall health of
all 'Mechs within "Broad-band" sensor range are displayed, and shared with all teammates. But you
don't see what weapons the targets are carrying or what specific components are damaged. You could also increase the sensor arc to a full 180º, or even more, if needed.
So how do these two modes interact? Well, "Broad-band" will not detect 'Mechs running "Narrow-band"
unless [
insert caveat of choice here]. This is where it gets fun. You can put in all sorts of interactions to make them work against each other. Some possibilities:
-"Broad-band" automatically detects "Narrow-band" only within a certain range - 300 meters, maybe. This is my least favorite solution because it's so basic and obvious, and it doesn't feel like it would add a whole lot to the game experience because it's entirely passive in nature. However, you could combine it with the two following mechanics as well.
-"Broad-band" automatically detects "Narrow-band" 'Mechs out to full sensor range, but
only when the "Narrow-band" enemy has his 'Mech's torso facing the "Broad-band" user. I
REALLY like this mechanic, as it forces players wanting to be stealthy to actually take care with their movements. And you can't fire upon the "Broad-band" user without him knowing where you were.
-"Narrow-band" targeting remains active while "Broad-band" is used, so the "Broad-band"-using 'Mech can only target "Narrow-band" 'Mechs manually. Again, not a great mechanic on its own, but can be combined with the previous two to make something more unique.
Personally, I think a combination of the three would be fantastic. All "Narrow-band" 'Mechs within 300 meters show up on your "Broad-band" sensors. Outside of 300 meters, they don't
automatically show up unless their torso is pointed in your direction. If they have their torsos turned away from you and are beyond 300 meters, you can still target them
manually and share that targeting info with your teammates, but you can only do it to one such target at a time. All targets within 300 meters and all "Narrow-band" targets that have their torsos pointed in your direction still show up on your "Broad-band," even while you track the one target beyond 300 meters that is pointed away.
So now you have two very different uses for the sensors. You run "Narrow" when you want some stealth, and "Broad" when you want your teammates to know where the enemies are. One is used by hunters, the other by guardians.
And what's even cooler, in order to ease the transition to this new sensor overhaul you can even implement a more basic "Mid-band" option! This would be virtually identical to the way sensors work in MWO right now. So the players who don't want to learn a new system don't have to - they get to keep using the current system. All "Mid-band" and "Broad-band" enemies within a 90º arc are detected, and show up on your HUD and minimap, but you can only track one at a time, and you can only share the info of the target you're tracking. The only difference is that "Narrow-band" 'Mechs wouldn't show up automatically unless they were facing you, or within 300 meters. So, not unlike ECM currently, but also not as powerful. Speaking of which - now, with this "Narrow" vs. "Broad" system? You can address the various EW systems in whole new ways.
-BAP would open up the option for a "Perimeter Sweep." This would function similar to "Broad-band," but increase the sensor arc to 360º and show all paper-doll info. While active, however, you become highly visible to all enemies within 600m that aren't blocked by terrain, even if you are not within their own sensor cones. They will also see that you are running a "Perimeter Sweep" via a little symbol next to your dorito on their HUD, or a sound alert. So prepare to become the center of attention.
-ECM could simply deny target sharing to enemies. Anyone can target and lock on to you, but you will not show up on their allies' HUDs or minimaps. You could also target an enemy running "Broad-band" or BAP, and press J to have that enemy receive ghost targets. Hee hee. And you can keep the protective bubble, maybe even with a 90 meter radius, since all your allies within the bubble can still be tracked by individual enemies.
-UAV could do what it does now, but also have the option for movement. Either let it hover in a specific spot, as it does currently, or aim it in a specific direction to have it travel over a short (400m?) distance. The real advantage is it gives you "Broad-band" sharing without making you so visible as if you were using it yourself.
-new consumable: Dropship Sweep. The Dropship that carried your team to the combat zone returns to do a sensor sweep. Starts from your position and shows all enemies within a 400-meter wide zone in the direction you indicate. Targets remain visible for 10 or 15 or whatever seconds.
So there you go. All of that, off the top of my head. And for free
PGI should be able to come up with just as much, and more. I urge them to.
Thrudvangar, on 26 July 2015 - 11:14 AM, said:
oops.. this change is already live? doesn't changes anything... i just even didn't recognized it..-.
No, not yet. Probably sometime in July, though.
Boaz Roshak, on 26 July 2015 - 11:44 AM, said:
We need a way to SEE that a leg is missing much like how we can see the arms are gone.
That, and torsos
No Mechwarrior game to date has shown side-torso loss. A real shame...
Oplix, on 26 July 2015 - 12:54 PM, said:
with this many ECM mechs the effective ECM range tweak really does nothing because they have so much ECM on their side and hurts IS more because all their ECM mechs are tier 1 where our ECM mechs are far worse.
D-DC - Too Heavy for CW decks and short range
2N - Our only high end ECM mech but its to short range
0XP - Low slung arms too short range
3L - No Jump Jets
The clans have way to many and far superior ECM mechs.
You are right about one thing. A range reduction for ECM won't really affect Community Warfare very much. But you're wrong about the reasons for that, as well as for saying that Clan ECM options so drastically surpass Inner Sphere ECM options. First, the Inner Sphere has more ECM 'Mechs than that:
Locust PB
Commando 2D
Spider 5D
Cicada 3M
I'll concede that the Commando doesn't count for much. The rest are very viable, however.
You're also wrong in saying the Inner Sphere ECM 'Mechs are "short range 'Mechs." Actually, that statement is an example of something called "not even wrong." There are no short- or long-range 'Mechs, only short- and long-range weapons. Cataphract, Atlas, and Griffin can all run long-range loadouts just fine.
And while it is true that the Raven 3L has no jumpjets, it is false to say that this matters much. Jump jets in MWO are very lackluster. They're only useful for either getting over small terrain obstacles, or moderately useful in a brawl. Neither of those situations affect the Raven much; it's too small to get hung up on tiny rocks, and ECM is more useful as a sniper tool than a brawling tool.
Finally, the Clans do not have multiple Tier 1 ECM 'Mechs. They have the Mist Lynx, the Kit Fox, the Arctic Cheetah, the Shadow Cat, and the Hellbringer. The Mist Lynx is pretty powerless, the Kit Fox isn't much better. That leaves three. The Shadow Cat is pretty good, but it has more maneuverability than it does firepower. So that leaves the Arctic Cheetah and the Hellbringer. The Hellbringer is good, but it's absolutely NOT Tier 1. ECM is the only reason it gets used; if it weren't for that, there'd be no advantage in taking such a weight-limited 'Mech over a Stormcrow or a Timber Wolf. The Arctic Cheetah remains - it may be Tier 1, time will tell. It's possible. But even if so, that gives the Clans exactly
one Tier 1 ECM option.
Now, like I said before, it is true that this won't affect CW a whole lot. You'll get the mid-grade teams that still run ECM in droves, and the upper-tier teams that ignore it completely. But that's not because of Clan vs. IS options or anything like that. It's just a consequence of what level of player is prone to using LRMs in CW matches. That's it.
Edited by Bloodweaver, 26 July 2015 - 04:34 PM.
45
