57 replies to this topic

[Joseph Mallan]

No. No I am not.

[Satan n stuff]

Praetor Knight, on 28 July 2015 - 07:56 PM, said:

Ignoring Arti, one could build an okay A1.

Alternatively you could try this. Jump jets with a NARC and more than enough LRM ammo to get your spam on. Jump and NARC, spam, repeat. Just don't get too close because that CT is an easy target when you're in the air.

[Devillin]

Radbane, on 28 July 2015 - 10:53 PM, said:

Beat my personal record yesterday in a LRM boat. 155 score / 1146 dmg. Ok, it was not a boat, more of a battleship. 4xLRM15, TAG, Advanced Target Decay module and 1800 missiles, all protected by the armor of a 100 ton Assault mech, and backed up with 3 Medium Pulselasers.

I agree with Radbane about his other points. While LRMs have taken a beating lately, their ineffectiveness is due to the players and not the weapon. Too many players try to treat them as fire and forget, instead of learning how they actually work, and learning the tricks to making them work better. I just started using a King Crab boating 2 LRM15+Artemis, 1 LRM10+Artemis, Advanced Target Delay, 360 Target Lock, AMS, 2 Lrg Pulse Lasers, TAG, and 4 Machine Guns. I fire my missiles on chainfire, both to hold down ammo usage and to speed up the reload time. I've been doing an average of 400 points a match, with one match having my all-time highest damage of 970 points of damage. More damage than everyone else in the match, much to the chagrin of the guy on my team who complained about a LRM boating King Crab getting 4 kills and 3 assists.

My other missile boat is a Stalker with either 4 LRM15, or sometimes 4 LRM20, AMS, and 4 Medium Lasers. Maximum armor and something like 7 tons of LRM ammo.

As some other folks have pointed out, the biggest trick to using LRMs effectively is to rely on yourself. Bring your own TAG and UAVs, and have the sensor boosting modules. Most puggers and team mates either don't know how, or just plain don't bother to hit R to target lock for you. If you are going to dumbfire your missiles, do it so that it will hit an area, and not just a mech. If you are boating, chainfire your missiles to cut down on ammo usage, and to rattle your targets with a constant stream of missiles. And last, but not least, bring a backup weapon to get you out of a jam. It always cracks me up when someone runs into the 2 large pulsers on my King Crab, or the 4 mediums on my Stalker, thinking that getting under my missile range makes me less dangerous.

[Devillin]

I forgot to mention: One good thing about piloting a LRM heavy mech is that you can be assured that most of your missiles will hit, since almost 90% of the players don't put AMS on their mechs. When you've got a roll going on, it's like shooting fish in a barrel.

[Lyoto Machida]

Radbane, on 28 July 2015 - 10:53 PM, said:

Beat my personal record yesterday in a LRM boat. 155 score / 1146 dmg. Ok, it was not a boat, more of a battleship. 4xLRM15, TAG, Advanced Target Decay module and 1800 missiles, all protected by the armor of a 100 ton Assault mech, and backed up with 3 Medium Pulselasers.

My favourite LRM machine is a Catapult with 2xLRM15 with Artemis, 1080 missiles and 4 medium lasers. It uses Advanced Target Decay and LRM15 cooldown modules. Easily 500-600 dmg which I find to be ok.

Now, people say there's no skill using LRM's. That's just an uneducated statement. Sure, you don't need as much eye-to-hand coordination, but you need tactical awereness and knowledge of all the in-game mechanics. The limited range of TAG, minimum range of LRMS's (meaning those 570m where LRM's work), lock on times, overflow of ECM, cover and the fact that we usually have few backupweapons makes position and chosing targets very important, and that's a skill.

My tip to you is to not rely to much on others for targets. Don't just think you can stay behind cover and fire blindly. That's what the skill-less Lurmers do. The missiles themselves gives away your position anyway, so you might aswell get out there togehter with the rest of your team and get dirty. Just make sure you're not the pointman and in the way of fire to much. However, your mech comes with armor too. Migrating some of the damage from your teammates onto yourself is a good thing for the whole team.

Even if the weapon is called Long-range they work better at medium range. You'll hit your targets faster, and they have less time to find cover. Also, advancing with your team gives you some protection against those lights that search and destroy lone LRM-boats who can't defend themselves in close range. Look over your builds and make sure to always bring a few lasers. Even if you're a boat, those might scare of lights and help you perform better, not to mention still make you a viable oponent even when you run out of missiles.

I'd say LRM's still work. Do they work the way I like? Nah, the mechanics aren't really what I'd like 'em to be, but they do work.

Are you saying that your LRM Catapult does 500-600 damage on average? If so, I find that hard to believe.

Devillin, on 29 July 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

I agree with Radbane about his other points. While LRMs have taken a beating lately, their ineffectiveness is due to the players and not the weapon. Too many players try to treat them as fire and forget, instead of learning how they actually work, and learning the tricks to making them work better. I just started using a King Crab boating 2 LRM15+Artemis, 1 LRM10+Artemis, Advanced Target Delay, 360 Target Lock, AMS, 2 Lrg Pulse Lasers, TAG, and 4 Machine Guns. I fire my missiles on chainfire, both to hold down ammo usage and to speed up the reload time. I've been doing an average of 400 points a match, with one match having my all-time highest damage of 970 points of damage. More damage than everyone else in the match, much to the chagrin of the guy on my team who complained about a LRM boating King Crab getting 4 kills and 3 assists.

My other missile boat is a Stalker with either 4 LRM15, or sometimes 4 LRM20, AMS, and 4 Medium Lasers. Maximum armor and something like 7 tons of LRM ammo.

As some other folks have pointed out, the biggest trick to using LRMs effectively is to rely on yourself. Bring your own TAG and UAVs, and have the sensor boosting modules. Most puggers and team mates either don't know how, or just plain don't bother to hit R to target lock for you. If you are going to dumbfire your missiles, do it so that it will hit an area, and not just a mech. If you are boating, chainfire your missiles to cut down on ammo usage, and to rattle your targets with a constant stream of missiles. And last, but not least, bring a backup weapon to get you out of a jam. It always cracks me up when someone runs into the 2 large pulsers on my King Crab, or the 4 mediums on my Stalker, thinking that getting under my missile range makes me less dangerous.

While it's true that most people aren't great at using LRMs, why go through all that hassle when you can just use direct fire weapons?

[Slepnir]

Or they could make LRMs function like they are supposed to.

There are only 4 weapons that have a lock mechanic in TT
streaks, improved ATMs, streak LRMS and arrow IV artillery missiles with TAG compatable ammo.

simply remove the LRM lock mechanic and increase flight speed to something comparable to real ground to ground missiles in real life say AC 5 speed, then we will stop hearing about "no.skill" weapons and LRMs will become a serious direct fire threat.

[Serpieri]

PGI was warned about ECM - and they ignored it.

[TWIAFU]

HeavyGun, on 28 July 2015 - 07:31 PM, said:

So why does PGI have LRM's in the game anymore?

Because the tears, they make great ice for my cocktails.

[grantini]

Devillin, on 29 July 2015 - 03:42 AM, said:

Most puggers and team mates either don't know how, or just plain don't bother to hit R to target lock for you.

Most puggers don't know that because it's not true. No one needs to "hit R" for a teammate to acquire a missile lock. Teammates will automatically relay targeting data whenever possible.

That is why when a friendly crests a hill, you will instantly see multiple legitimate appear on your radar. That is also why every single enemy under a UAV can be locked regardless of whether friendlies have line-of-sight or not.

[Gremlich Johns]

Apparently, Paul said something about the ECM cloak radius being decreased by half.

[Lyoto Machida]

Gremlich Johns, on 29 July 2015 - 04:18 PM, said:

Apparently, Paul said something about the ECM cloak radius being decreased by half.

So just increase the number of ECM mechs on your team to compensate, I suppose.

[Ted Wayz]

Funny how within a couple days you can have a thread complaining that LRMs are too effective and another saying they do not work at all. If you average the two then LRMs must be just fine.

[Weztside]

It's rather common these days for me to hear my teammates crying out for someone to call a target only to hear someone scream back that there is so much ECM coverage that target designations and even target info is nonexistent. An organized team can essentially remove a fundamental mechanic such as target info from the game with absolute ECM coverage. Reducing the bubble from 180 meters to 90 won't change this. A group of 6 players can field 6 ECM mechs. A group of 12 can technically field a team of 12 ECM equipped mechs. On top of this the dominant strategy in this community continues to be the everlasting "deathball". Nothing short of totally altering the mechanics of ECM is going to reverse the fact that PGI has flooded the queues with ECM mechs in order to make money. They are now using resources made in this process to rebalance ECM and figure out how to fix a problem they created. But hey, what the hell do I know I've only played this game 800+ hours over the years.

[Kjudoon]

How to make LRMS relevant without doing anything to them: engage dynamic convergence or cone of fire. Df is then on nearly similar footing as lrms.l unable to apply all damage to the same component if all even hits.

Of course the other solution would be to have all missiles get perfect convergence too on a random part so those packs of 40 to 60 missiles act just like the df fire noy who catch someone in the open.

Again problem equalized.

Screams of panick and rage in 3...2...1...

[Satan n stuff]

grantini, on 29 July 2015 - 04:16 PM, said:

Most puggers don't know that because it's not true. No one needs to "hit R" for a teammate to acquire a missile lock. Teammates will automatically relay targeting data whenever possible.

That is why when a friendly crests a hill, you will instantly see multiple legitimate appear on your radar. That is also why every single enemy under a UAV can be locked regardless of whether friendlies have line-of-sight or not.

This is incorrect.
Teammates will only share their current target and they will only automatically lock on if they don't already have a target locked. No mech can share more than one target at any given time. UAVs will share all targets in range and in LOS.

[Aim64C]

Slepnir, on 29 July 2015 - 03:39 PM, said:

Or they could make LRMs function like they are supposed to.

There are only 4 weapons that have a lock mechanic in TT
streaks, improved ATMs, streak LRMS and arrow IV artillery missiles with TAG compatable ammo.

simply remove the LRM lock mechanic and increase flight speed to something comparable to real ground to ground missiles in real life say AC 5 speed, then we will stop hearing about "no.skill" weapons and LRMs will become a serious direct fire threat.

This is incorrect.

The only missile system that did not have a lock mechanism is the MRM system. The rocket launchers could be considered missile systems - but they are distinguished as rockets.

What made Streak systems different was that, in tabletop, when you fired a missile weapon, your to-hit roll was essentially a to-lock roll. Streak missile systems would only fire if your roll would result in a hit.

Thus, when firing SRMs, the SRMs were locking missiles that would guide to the target. The thing is, however, that if you chose to fire and failed to lock, then you wasted your ammunition. Though I believe LRMs could still be applied as being fired indirectly (which was a very inefficient way to use them)... I'd have to check on that.

The advantage to streaks was simply that you knew that firing the weapon would consume ammunition only if you hit.

However, within a game system like MWO, streaks have absolutely no purpose as there's no combat longevity or campaign supply lines to worry about. Further, implementing them in a real-time arena action-simshootercade in a way that is functionally different from non-streak and artemis-enabled equipment is not as straight forward.

The game is built around lock-and-fire a juxtaposed fire-and-lock systems would be rather difficult to work into something intuitive for the player. This means that the very concept of streaks being ammunition saving would have to take on a different implementation and concept that is somewhat different from the lore description.

SRMs, for example, should still lock - whether they are streak or not. The question is simply how to incorporate that system into both a functional mechanic and useful UI. I don't believe the current locking mechanic for SRMs or LRMs is really a proper system. But that's another story.

[Slepnir]

Aim64C

I have been playing TT since 87' and I still play regularly and your post is mostly incorrect. Standard SRMs never had a lock mechanic. they were akin to short range katushyas or an LBX spread. That's why the missile hit chart is so random and missiles rarely do full damage(only a roll of 11+ on 2d6 is a full hit which is why artemis giving you a +2 on the chart can be a big deal) If missiles traveled at accurate speeds in MWO you could easily lead your targets with LRMs and SRMs if they were close enough.

There were variant types of ammo that could only be put into standard SRM or LRM launchers such as FTL(follow the leader-lost tech) and FASCAM that behave differently

Indirect fire LRMs still don't lock, it's a complex game mechanic which can best be described as an artillery spotter verbally telling you where to shoot. even a proper C3 network won't allow indirect fire, the target must be in weapons range and line of sight the C3 just lets you fire as if you were as close as your friendly C3 unit effectively feeding you target data for a more accurate shot. If you really want indirect fire in battletech you bring artillery or arrow IV with proximity fuses

The other systems I described that come later in the timeline effectively work with a lock mechanic like streaks. arrow IV TAG compatible munitions has a slight chance to miss (2 or 3 on 2d6) but still locks on.

Edited by Slepnir, 30 July 2015 - 05:44 AM.

[Khobai]

Quote

Standard SRMs never had a lock mechanic, not even in fluff. they were akin to short range katushyas or an LBX spread.

Wrong. standard SRMs did have a primitive guidance system and lock-on mechancs in fluff. thats why artemis and narc increased their chance to hit. Without a guidance system, theres no way SRMs would be able to home in on artemis and NARC.

Artemis and NARC specifically dont work with MRMs because MRMs are dumbfire. MRMs also get a +1 penalty for being dumbfire which SRMs dont get; which means SRMs arnt dumbfire.

SRMs should actually work the same way as Streaks but have to roll on a missile chart to see how many missiles hit (instead of all the missiles always hitting like streaks). And artemis/narc would increase the number of missiles that hit. MRMs on the other hand would work very similar to how SRMs work now.

Edited by Khobai, 30 July 2015 - 05:52 AM.

[Slepnir]

Khobai, on 30 July 2015 - 05:43 AM, said:

Wrong. standard SRMs did have a primitive guidance system and lock-on mechancs in fluff. thats why artemis and narc increased their chance to hit. Without a guidance system, theres no way SRMs would be able to home in on artemis and NARC.

Artemis and NARC specifically dont work with MRMs because MRMs are dumbfire. MRMs also get a +1 penalty for being dumbfire which SRMs dont get; which means SRMs arnt dumbfire.

SRMs should actually work the same way as Streaks but have to roll on a missile chart to see how many missiles hit (instead of all the missiles always hitting like streaks). And artemis/narc would increase the number of missiles that hit. MRMs on the other hand would work very similar to how SRMs work now.

To the rules
NARC requires the use of semi guided narc eqipped missiles. in fact it allows indirect fire WITHOUT a spotter, lucky we don't have to use that alternate ammo in MWO.

For clarification players with C3 on the tabletop can still use the LRM indirect fire spotting rules but they gain no benefit from the C3 network.

for special rules for missiles
total warfare P138
"missile launchers-the following rules cover missile launchers that fall outside the standard rules for such weapons"

Sub section streaks
"the player must roll for a target lock each turn" this compared to a standard to hit roll for SRMs

Also LRMs and SRMs are described as
self-guided missiles which is a bit confusing because they don't technically lock on, On TT they follow the same mechanic as firing a laser or autocannon at a target they just get randomized damage. as far as I can tell it seems they are fired in the general direction of the enemy and use some kind of IFF to go after a target. fire and forget perhaps? that would make them even better than the target decay module if they chased you around after the firing unit stopped tracking you.

MRMs are true dumb fire since they don't have self tracking making them smaller and cheaper.

Edited by Slepnir, 30 July 2015 - 06:36 AM.

[Aim64C]

Slepnir, on 30 July 2015 - 05:34 AM, said:

Aim64C

I have been playing TT since 87' and I still play regularly and your post is mostly incorrect. Standard SRMs never had a lock mechanic. they were akin to short range katushyas or an LBX spread. That's why the missile hit chart is so random and missiles rarely do full damage(only a roll of 11+ on 2d6 is a full hit which is why artemis giving you a +2 on the chart can be a big deal) If missiles traveled at accurate speeds in MWO you could easily lead your targets with LRMs and SRMs if they were close enough.

There were variant types of ammo that could only be put into standard SRM or LRM launchers such as FTL(follow the leader-lost tech) and FASCAM that behave differently

Indirect fire LRMs still don't lock, it's a complex game mechanic which can best be described as an artillery spotter verbally telling you where to shoot. even a proper C3 network won't allow indirect fire, the target must be in weapons range and line of sight the C3 just lets you fire as if you were as close as your friendly C3 unit effectively feeding you target data for a more accurate shot. If you really want indirect fire in battletech you bring artillery or arrow IV with proximity fuses

The other systems I described that come later in the timeline effectively work with a lock mechanic like streaks. arrow IV TAG compatible munitions has a slight chance to miss (2 or 3 on 2d6) but still locks on.

Judging from your next post, I am going to guess that we simply have a difference of semantics.

When I use the concept of a "lock" - that means the target has been identified within the fire control system and designated as the target for the given weapons system. Within battletech, LRMs and SRMs both incorporate guidance systems. This means that they are not dumb-fire, and require a fire control system to tell them what, precisely, among the sensor/image clutter, is the designated target.

A "lock" does not, therefor, guarantee a hit. In the case of aviation missiles, we refer to this as "Probability [of] kill" or Pk. There are numerous factors that play into Pk, from target reaction, jamming, sensor clutter, decoy countermeasures, range, relative closure and arc velocities, etc. A lock merely denotes that one has successfully acquired the target and relayed that information to the munition. In some cases, the concept of a "lock" is further expanded to be when the fire control system estimates a Pk of greater than, say, 80%.

In the case of LRM missile batteries, the to-hit roll is an approximation of all of these factors. The to-hit is done per battery. The cluster roll is done to determine damage distribution.

In weapon systems like the Aim-9 Sidewinder, target acquisition is achieved through reconciling the radar telemetry from the source aircraft (which can be a datalinked aircraft) with the IR imaging of the sidewinder missile. A "lock" is, therefor, entirely internal to the fire control system and has an entirely virtual feedback loop once the seeker has imaged the target.

A real feedback loop, for example, would be something like laser designation or a passive radar imaging system operating off of the aircraft's radar. Both of these would confirm that what the source aircraft has designated as the target and what the missile is selecting as the target are, in fact, the same thing.

Compare this to systems like the AIM-120 AMRAAM, where the missile is assigned a thrust vector from the launch aircraft based upon the aircraft's fire control system. From here, the missile receives updates on target position from the firing aircraft via datalink, before it is close enough to activate its own active radar system to identify and guide to the target (what is known as "terminal guidance." This is virtually identical to how the Aim-54 Phoenix worked, and is similar to various inertial guidance systems used by Russian missiles that had terminal guidance phases that used everything from SARH to IR and even a few experiments with optical guidance if I remember correctly.

I would suggest this is how LRMs in Battletech most likely operate. When you roll your to-hit, it is an abstraction of the pilot's ability to physically move into position, acquire the target, fire the missiles, and for those missiles to properly enter terminal guidance within the seeker range.

Hence why TAG and NARC are both substantial helps.

Artemis IV is, essentially, an implementation of SARH - where the radar illuminates the target to be struck, and the missiles, upon entering terminal phase, guide on that targeting radar's return.

Per Sarna, this is how Streaks are described:

" Originally developed in 2647 by the Star League, the Streak SRM Launcher is relatively similar to the standard SRM launcher but incorporates a unique Targa-7 fire control system. This system consists of a multi-lens sensor linked to a microwave targeting laser and battle computer built in to the launcher. When activated the system fires multiple light pulses at the target, and if the sensor detects a positive return signal from 90% or more of the pulses the battle computer authorizes missile launch; once airborne the missiles receive constant telemetry updates from the system to ensure they hit their target. In contrast if the system does not receive sufficient feedback before firing to guarantee a hit it will prevent the missiles from launching. This special feature of the system prevents the weapon from firing at a target when there is no lock-on, saving ammunition by preventing shots that would miss.[1] "

This is, essentially, describing a real feedback loop to ensure the missiles are properly identifying the target and that they have a clear line of fire to the target. This is a system that requires confirmation of missile lock before it can fire.

LRMs and SRMs still acquire their target and guide to it. The system is just not built to confirm that the missiles will lock onto the target once they are within their seeker range. Therefor - they have a much higher probability to miss as, supposedly, the pilot has no way to verify that the fire control system and the missiles are on the same page (and perhaps there is no mid-course update system - meaning that the telemetry at launch is the only means of getting the missiles into seeker range).

This is markedly different from dumb-fire, in which there is no guidance system and the missiles simply burn in a ballistic trajectory.

LRMs and SRMs lock onto their targets (when they hit).

Streak systems are built to require confirmation of a lock before they can fire.

Neither system is dumb-fire.