50 replies to this topic

[Brizna]

This is related to the ECM change (undewhelming as it is) but is independent since LRMs remain an issue in this game.

Currently if you don't have a lock LRMs go to whatever you are pointing at as you fire my suggestion is: to enhance that system so that LRMs keep going to where you point as they fly, so if you can't get a lock you can at least redirect them to your target as it moves if you can see it.

Ok that is a small change but it would help Lurmers in the age of ECM while encouraging them to participate more actively with their team. We could stop here but I would actually go further than that:

*Remove target locking for regular LRMs at all so they have to be used always with direct line of fire and holding sight on them.

Exceptions:
*LRM artemis can be locked by using direct line of sight only and only if target is unprotected by ECM
*Enemies that are either taged or narced can be locked onto without a direct line of sight. NARC is cancelled by ECM in range of target, TAG by ECM in range of TAGING mech.

PS: This feature suggestion isn't meant to nerf or overpower LRMs but to decouple ECM and LRM systems so both can be balanced more easily, it is very likely to require statistical balancing of LRM weapon systems; missile speed, cool down, packet tightness and length... are all good variables to start with if LRMS becomes either OP or underwhelming.
PS2: This feature is in my opinion of a good -game wise- value and better than the current system by itself but it has the added value of being mostly canon.
PS3: Opens the potential to add c3 system to IS giving it one of the few advantages it has over clans on canon.

[InspectorG]

So basically a free Target Retention Module?

Just use a TAG and get direct locks for better spread/etc.

[Brizna]

Nope you have to keep track of the target with your sights because missiles aren't locked, they fly at what you look at. It is both a blessing and a curse for lurmers. Only TAG, Artemis and NARC allow for limited locking, that is having the missiles go for the target independently of where you look at.

[Midax]

This should happen. Plus a speed buff to the missiles or the required face time to guide them in will be a suicide mission.

[Khobai]

ECM change is dumb and is not at all what the player base wants. We dont want ECM to grant stealth at all. It doesnt do it in tabletop and shouldnt do it in MWO.

Stealth needs to come with a cost. Like stealth via passive sensors would make you turn your sensors off. Or stealth via null signature system requires lots of tonnage/crits and generates heat. ECM gives free stealth for no cost which is incredibly unbalanced.

We dont want ECM nerfed to 90m. We want it nerfed to not give stealth at all. Or at most only give stealth to the mech its equipped on.

Edited by Khobai, 17 July 2015 - 07:52 AM.

[MikeBend]

Now a lot of times it was proposed, that LRMs should follow the target reticle, and the counter argument usually is: bring TAG. So i had this weird idea for some time now - what if LRM will be made to follow TAG? I think it will add some interesting variation to lurming.

[WarHippy]

Brizna, on 17 July 2015 - 07:26 AM, said:

This is related to the ECM change (undewhelming as it is) but is independent since LRMs remain an issue in this game.

Currently if you don't have a lock LRMs go to whatever you are pointing at as you fire my suggestion is: to enhance that system so that LRMs keep going to where you point as they fly, so if you can't get a lock you can at least redirect them to your target as it moves if you can see it.

Ok that is a small change but it would help Lurmers in the age of ECM while encouraging them to participate more actively with their team. We could stop here but I would actually go further than that:

*Remove target locking for regular LRMs at all so they have to be used always with direct line of fire and holding sight on them.

Exceptions:
*LRM artemis can be locked by using direct line of sight only and only if target is unprotected by ECM
*Enemies that are either taged or narced can be locked onto without a direct line of sight. NARC is cancelled by ECM in range of target, TAG by ECM in range of TAGING mech.

PS: This feature suggestion isn't meant to nerf or overpower LRMs but to decouple ECM and LRM systems so both can be balanced more easily, it is very likely to require statistical balancing of LRM weapon systems; missile speed, cool down, packet tightness and length... are all good variables to start with if LRMS becomes either OP or underwhelming.
PS2: This feature is in my opinion of a good -game wise- value and better than the current system by itself but it has the added value of being mostly canon.
PS3: Opens the potential to add c3 system to IS giving it one of the few advantages it has over clans on canon.

All of these things have been suggested before. It nerfs LRMs too heavily in multiple ways, and requires a lot of coordination to use indirectly that you simply will not get outside of a dedicated group.

[Love in an Annihilator]

MikeBend, on 17 July 2015 - 07:52 AM, said:

Now a lot of times it was proposed, that LRMs should follow the target reticle, and the counter argument usually is: bring TAG. So i had this weird idea for some time now - what if LRM will be made to follow TAG? I think it will add some interesting variation to lurming.

Or PGI could hire some goons who kick you in the balls every time you shoot lurms to make them useless AND painful.

Seriously, lurms need a buff.

[JohnnyWayne]

Rick Sanchez 1895, on 17 July 2015 - 08:06 AM, said:

Or PGI could hire some goons who kick you in the balls every time you shoot lurms to make them useless AND painful.

Seriously, lurms need a buff.

A buff? They are already the biggest CC in game what else do you want? CC that also kills? U insane?

Edited by JohnnyWayne, 17 July 2015 - 08:19 AM.

[Weeny Machine]

Khobai, on 17 July 2015 - 07:50 AM, said:

ECM change is dumb and is not at all what the player base wants. We dont want ECM to grant stealth at all. It doesnt do it in tabletop and shouldnt do it in MWO.

Stealth needs to come with a cost. Like stealth via passive sensors would make you turn your sensors off. Or stealth via null signature system requires lots of tonnage/crits and generates heat. ECM gives free stealth for no cost which is incredibly unbalanced.

We dont want ECM nerfed to 90m. We want it nerfed to not give stealth at all. Or at most only give stealth to the mech its equipped on.

The 90m reduction won't help at all. Simply because more and more mechs with ECM are available.

As you said already: ECM shouldn't grant a kind of invisiblity. Especially some later technologies (3060) are made obsolete by ECM because it does what they do - just better at less cost.
However, LRMs need some change then, too, or we end up in an LRM-Apocalypse. The lock mechanic is simply crazily good. Maybe make LRMs fire and forget after being TAGged for a certain time or NARCed while removing the “normal” lock. At the same time buff the direct fire capability (e.g. speed buff)

[Khobai]

Quote

he 90m reduction won't help at all. Simply because more and more mechs with ECM are available.

exactly.

reducing ecm radius will just result in teams taking more ecm mechs.

it will kill any mech variety the game had before.

[Midax]

Think about what a change like this would mean for the game.

LRMs would perform like a lighter LBX of the same class. Inferior to a standard AC of the same class for damage. The lesser weight and crits are balanced by the fact any mech can take AMS.

Indirect fire requires more teamwork as spotting equipment must be used. LRMs would be carried on more mechs so there would be a demand for scout mechs.

ECM wouldn't neuter LRMs only the spotting equipment needed to indirect fire. That would allow ECM to be a larger radius.

An Atlas can carry LRMs and not get laughed at...maybe. The 6 missile Cat would be able to be a pure fire support mech instead of forced into a splatcat build.

[Hotthedd]

WarHippy, on 17 July 2015 - 07:58 AM, said:

All of these things have been suggested before. It nerfs LRMs too heavily in multiple ways, and requires a lot of coordination to use indirectly that you simply will not get outside of a dedicated group.

Not necessarily. Missile speed, missile spread, and splash damage might need to be tweaked though.

Indirect fire would still be possible, but the shooter would need to guide the missiles high in the air to get over cover. This gives LRMs the ability to be area-denial weapons, and completely negates ECM making LRMs useless. ECM would ONLY deny a dorito on the target.

Direct fire would actually be buffed. PGI could (and should) get rid of the lock on mechanic entirely. Let the missiles be "guided" by the pilot.

[Lightfoot]

@OP Too many changes. Unbalanced.

LRMs are as weak as they are because they have the indirect fire capability, meaning removing that would require an incredible buff to LoS and everyone who hates missiles would curse the change and whine like a scorched Balrog.

PGI's vision is that LRMer's have a light Scout mech allied to delivering the missiles based on the Scout mech's LoS of targets. Role warfare rule one really.

I have no problem dumb-firing LRMs right now. It's a little tricky, but that's ok.

LRMs in general are a little weak and require a LRM specialized mech to get anything out of the tactics required. I think that's wrong, but I also think MWO's gauss is too apocryphal and should be restored to canon TT specs too.

After many years of MW2, MW3, and MW4 multiplayer league play where they establish rules of engagement as a back structure, I know the mechs are all different and the weapons all different to establish a variety of different tactics.

Thus when used tactically correct the weapon is powerful and when the tactic is defeated the weapon is only average. So a weapon can move through states of seeming OP'ness to weakness and this is what you want. LRMs are a bit too weak when LoS is constant and really weak with no LoS/indirect. I am not complaining but the Laser domination of MWO is one reason CW is not as interesting as it should be. Lasers dominate because LRMs, PPCs, and Gauss Rifles have been nerfed too much. They need to represent solid tactical choices when used on the right mech.

[Midax]

Did you know that LRMs have not always been able to indirect fire in TT? They were originally just a long range weapon system. As they added weapons and equipment to the rules to added indirect fire to LRMs. Indirect fire even started out as lvl 3 rules and weren't "official" until a later edition.

Buff direct fire and make indirect fire equipment based. Role warefare does not mean all lights are scouts. Equipping Tag are Narcs is what makes a mech a spotter. A firestarter should not be able to give locks to the LRM mechs just because he locked a target while he is skirmishing.

Edited by Midax, 17 July 2015 - 09:06 AM.

[YourSaviorLegion]

You could also quit being a lrm happy scrub boat and learn how to use ballistic and energy weapons, just sayin'!

Edited by YourSaviorLegion, 17 July 2015 - 09:14 AM.

[Dashen]

i use 4 lrm15+artemis on my vulture, i dont find they need a buff, i have tag, and i'm pretty satisfied with how they work now.

Sometimes we forget what weapon systems are made for.


Edit: i also have 4 cermeds on it.

Edited by Dashen, 17 July 2015 - 09:15 AM.

[Gas Guzzler]

Khobai, on 17 July 2015 - 07:50 AM, said:

ECM change is dumb and is not at all what the player base wants. We dont want ECM to grant stealth at all. It doesnt do it in tabletop and shouldnt do it in MWO.

Stealth needs to come with a cost. Like stealth via passive sensors would make you turn your sensors off. Or stealth via null signature system requires lots of tonnage/crits and generates heat. ECM gives free stealth for no cost which is incredibly unbalanced.

We dont want ECM nerfed to 90m. We want it nerfed to not give stealth at all. Or at most only give stealth to the mech its equipped on.

I'm good with the stealth. The entire player base will have varying opinions, not everyone agrees that they don't want stealth on ECM.

Personally, I'm all for making it difficult for the LRM warriors. Why should they get a free ride?

[Dashen]

It takes practice to use them effectively, without artemis and tag they are just a waste, low tracking strenght, high spread. Also not every lock is a good lock.

[Gas Guzzler]

Dashen, on 17 July 2015 - 09:37 AM, said:

It takes practice to use them effectively, without artemis and tag they are just a waste, low tracking strenght, high spread. Also not every lock is a good lock.

#willneverbeimpressed