116 replies to this topic

[Mechwarrior Buddah]

woo not even an assault

[Arctourus]

six long pages of blah blah blah

[RedMercury]

Bump. (Shameless, but I did spend two hours writing the OP and it is disappointing to see the thread relegated to the 4th page.)

Anyway, not much else to do but forumwarrior while MWO tries to connect to the oceanic servers for the last half hour.

[Hotthedd]

It is a very good idea, Red Mercury. Especially the SSRM mechanic.

You just need to condense the idea into 126 characters so it can be tweeted and PGI will actually read it.

[RedMercury]

Heh, honestly I don't expect anyone to listen. Better chance implementing the mechanics I want in my modification of Blender Battletech (if anyone knows blender well, I would love to learn how to add hitboxes; pickledtezcat only made a single torso hitbox for every mech, almost every other change I wanted I can do in the python code), or just keep editing RogueMek (which is surprisingly fun, actually)

[RedMercury]

Sorry if I missed all the posts addressed to OP, but I'll reply to the recurring theme: that I dislike LRMs and SSRMs and want to downgrade them.

I think I'm pretty neutral in terms of both weapons. I've done my share of LRM boating, though I never owned a streakcat. Actually, I'm not overly concerned with missiles themselves, but on the overall balance of the game. Actually, not just the balance of the game, but the ability of the designers to balance it. The way I see it, the designers have a difficult time tweaking things because too many things are entangled or interlocked. If we can remove some unintended entanglements between different game mechanics which cause the unfortunate situations where changing one mechanic suddenly makes another overpowered or underpowered, it would be easier to design new mechanics and offer more freedom and leeway to make the new mechanics fun and rich in terms of gameplay, without breaking what is existing.

In this thread, I wanted to address the entanglement caused by the locking system. This allows the designers to design ECM and other information warfare mechanics in a more free way, in a way to improve gameplay, game depth, and room for competitive game play more effectively, without being dragged into the endless cycle of tweaking inter-locking systems for balance (in this case LRM/SSRM vs ECM).

The most obvious way I saw to achieve this was to remove the LRM and SSRM dependence on the locking system. But these weapon systems still need to be viable and fun; (See? I do not want them nerfed, I want them to be a useful part of the game) thus I suggested one way that perhaps they can still remain viable and fun; there are probably others, and possibly better alternatives! I actually don't really care which!

But one thing I do like about my suggestion for LRMs is that it gives players the ability to use them like unguided artillery, to attack locations without requiring a lock. I think that can add a lot of depth to the game.

[Hotthedd]

If you look at it objectively, it is actually an overall BUFF to LRMs.

It just goes to show what most Lurmers ACTUALLY need (auto-hit locks). Don't take that crutch away.

[RedMercury]

Hotthedd, on 03 September 2015 - 08:11 AM, said:

If you look at it objectively, it is actually an overall BUFF to LRMs.

Perhaps. Only playtesting can tell objectively.
But I personally stay away from arguments involving what takes more skill (partly since I suck), because they raise emotions, which cloud judgement and only get in the way of constructive discussion.

[Hotthedd]

RedMercury, on 03 September 2015 - 08:17 AM, said:

Perhaps. Only playtesting can tell objectively.
But I personally stay away from arguments involving what takes more skill (partly since I suck), because they raise emotions, which cloud judgement and only get in the way of constructive discussion.

I'm pretty sure making it possible to aim LRMs, giving them direct-fire capability AND indirect-fire could only be seen as a buff to the weapon system. Especially since ECM would no longer affect LRMs if there was direct LoS.

[Kjudoon]

Hotthedd, on 03 September 2015 - 08:11 AM, said:

If you look at it objectively, it is actually an overall BUFF to LRMs.

It just goes to show what most Lurmers ACTUALLY need (auto-hit locks). Don't take that crutch away.

What's that under your armpits?

>cough< perfect convergence >cough<

[Hotthedd]

Kjudoon, you HAVE to know nobody argues against the perfect convergence fail mechanic more than I do.

[Kjudoon]

Hotthedd, on 03 September 2015 - 09:00 AM, said:

Kjudoon, you HAVE to know nobody argues against the perfect convergence fail mechanic more than I do.

Then I guess criticizing LRMs for something they don't have doesn't help. Locks do not translate to auto hit. That would be "Perfect fire and forget".

Edited by Kjudoon, 03 September 2015 - 09:03 AM.

[Hotthedd]

Kjudoon, on 03 September 2015 - 09:02 AM, said:

Then I guess criticizing LRMs for something they don't have doesn't help. Locks do not translate to auto hit. That would be "Perfect fire and forget".

If you keep the lock, the missiles will hit as long as nothing gets in the path of the missiles. That is what is meant by "auto-hit".
Keeping a lock is less difficult than keeping the reticle on the target.

But it is the lock mechanic that produced the ECM "stealth" mechanic, that gave us BAP, NARC, and TAG changes that do not work as they do in battletech.

MW:O has more bandages than an emo mummy.

[Kjudoon]

Well, the picture painted by the phrase "Auto-hit" is somewhat misleading. That's like saying , as long as you lead the target properly, you will automatically hit. Yeah... of course you will. Or if you keep the laser on the target.... you get the point.

You make it sound like maintaining lock is far less difficult than hitscan even when you have to do it often for many multiples longer than any of the other weapons.

Or that it's somehow unfair. Which it isn't.

[Hotthedd]

Kjudoon, on 03 September 2015 - 09:24 AM, said:

Well, the picture painted by the phrase "Auto-hit" is somewhat misleading. That's like saying , as long as you lead the target properly, you will automatically hit. Yeah... of course you will. Or if you keep the laser on the target.... you get the point.

You make it sound like maintaining lock is far less difficult than hitscan even when you have to do it often for many multiples longer than any of the other weapons.

Or that it's somehow unfair. Which it isn't.

Not saying it is unfair, its the same for any LRM user.
You realize the low speed is because of the lock mechanic, right?

Yes, at least for me, maintaining lock is far easier than holding a full burn duration of a hit-scan weapon on a moving target.
Especially if I can do it without being subject to return fire while I do it.

[wanderer]

Quote

LRMs can carry a game, but it largely depends on team tactics. If your PUG decides to fight on an unfavourable-

Stop right there.

LRMs depend on a -lack- of team tactics.

An actual team sets up with ECM coverage and your LRMs are now the slowest, spread-iest, lousiest direct-firing weapon in the game.

This is why LRMs don't exist as meaningful weapons against organized opponents and are the laughingstock of CW.

You want to make LRMs useful? Here ya go.

1) Change ECM from "prevents locks" to "increased lock time".
2) Give LRMs self-guidance after 480m (3 seconds) of locked-on flight. If lock is maintained, LRMs fly as normal (gaining Artemis/NARC/TAG bonuses)- if lock is lost after 3 seconds of flight time,LRMs revert to no-bonus flight mode but still guide to target. If lock is lost before 3 seconds of flight time, missiles go "dumb" as they do now when a lock is lost.
3) Double reload times. No more missile spam and lower ammo consumption rates.
4) Increase missile damage to go along with 3), avoiding a loss of DPS.

[El Bandito]

Mechwarrior Buddah, on 31 August 2015 - 08:30 PM, said:

woo not even an assault

Hyper quirked easy-mode 4J, on Caustic. As I told Jman, and one another, I tell you this too. Brag about doing good lurming in a Medium if you managed to do it with non-hyper quirked mech, like the Shadowhawk. I can have that score in a 4J while falling asleep at the keyboard. Especially in Caustic.

This is like bragging about having good score in a 60 ton Heavy--except the Heavy turned out to be Dragon-1N.

Edited by El Bandito, 03 September 2015 - 04:04 PM.