86 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

El Bandito, on 11 October 2015 - 06:54 AM, said:

Fixed that for you. Clan LRMs are very lightweight and have good direct fire angles, and can deal damage within 180 meter range. They are fine to be brought along and one can have plenty of tonnage left for back up weapons.
Unlike what many people think, Clan LRM > IS LRM.

dont agree i think IS LRMs are better,
they can hit harder and arnt killed as easly form AMS as they are in a volley,
they also have less spread, though they are double the Weight,

i think Targeting needs abit of a rework to make them useful then balance from there,

[GrimRiver]

I don't know, the state of LRMs is iffy to me. When I use them they do almost nothing to anything, even fully open bloodred lights but when they're used against me they tear me apart in 2 or 3 volleys. Maybe buff them but bump up the cooldown 0.5 per LRM size.

[TyphonCh]

When they nerfed their speed I think is where LRMs went downhill. Hitting anything past 800m is damn near impossible because you can literally out run them

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Peter2k, on 11 October 2015 - 08:35 AM, said:

most games are lost because assault pilots were indecisive and waited for the mediums and heavies to push by themselves

In PGI's mechwarrior assaults are not damage soakers.

Supposedly them being so big to miss, and being so slow that all of their armor can be simply bypassed by anything faster than them....was a trade off for more armor.....that gets bypassed by anything faster than them....b/c their too big to miss.

Soooo in PGI's mechwarrior speed and small hit boxes are actually the only form of "armor"...

and Heavies and mediums have just as much firepower thanks to quirks and unrestricted weapon placements....

So no, assaults really have no place in PGI's mechwarrior.

But hey at least all of the other class pilots that were mad they couldn't have the best of both worlds got the game changed so that they could.

[Khobai]

Quote

So no, assaults really have no place in PGI's mechwarrior.

some do. the direwolf and stalker find their niches for example. but as a generalization its true that assaults lack a role and mostly end up being way worse heavies.


As for LRMs the fix is VERY simple.

1) remove ecm stealth. LRMs will never be a viable weapon as long as ECM makes targeting impossible. If PGI wants stealth in the game they can add null signature system, which grants stealth, but also has all the appropriate drawbacks that an effect as powerful as stealth should have.

2) nerf indirect LRMs, give indirect LRMs a very high probability of missing the target. The only time indirect lrms should be accurate enough to be deadly is if the target is TAGGED or NARCd. Nerfing LRMs that way completely prevents another LRMageddon from occurring.

3) buff direct LRMs and artemis. Give artemis increased crit chance for SRMs and direct LRMs. because its basically a targeting computer for missiles.

4) add ammo switching to the game and incorporate different ammo types for LRMs like thunder/swarm LRMs. or add thunder/swarm LRMs as seperate weapons entirely if ammo switching isnt possible. That would help give LRM-type weapons an area denial role and hopefully secure them a niche in the game.

Edited by Khobai, 11 October 2015 - 03:56 PM.

[Livewyr]

LRMs are feast or famine- that's their problem.

[Khobai]

Quote

LRMs are feast or famine- that's their problem.

pretty much. Which is why they need to eliminate both extremes

extreme #1 = ecm stealth which prevents targeting (i.e. famine)
extreme #2 = overpowered indirect LRMs which can hammer targets relentlessly while remaining safe from retaliation (i.e. feast)

which is why ecm stealth needs to be removed. and why indirect LRMs need a massive accuracy nerf so they miss most of the time (unless the target is TAGGED or NARCd, in which case indirect LRMs should lock on as usual).

[Livewyr]

Khobai, on 11 October 2015 - 04:01 PM, said:

pretty much. Which is why they need to eliminate both extremes

extreme #1 = ecm stealth which prevents targeting (i.e. famine)
extreme #2 = overpowered indirect LRMs which can hammer targets relentlessly while remaining safe from retaliation (i.e. feast)

which is why ecm stealth needs to be removed. and why indirect LRMs need a massive accuracy nerf so they miss most of the time (unless the target is TAGGED or NARCd, in which case indirect LRMs should lock on as usual).

This. Except..

I would add that LRM locks can only be achieved directly, unless by TAG or Narc... and indirect lrms need to have greater spread.

[Khobai]

Quote

I would add that LRM locks can only be achieved directly, unless by TAG or Narc... and indirect lrms need to have greater spread.

im not sure I like that because then youre entirely dependent on someone on your team having TAG or NARC in order to indirect fire.

I think all you should need to indirect fire is a spotter. But indirect fire should be fairly inaccurate without TAG or NARC. That way you can still indirect fire if someone on your team isnt carrying TAG/NARC.

[Livewyr]

Khobai, on 11 October 2015 - 04:15 PM, said:

im not sure I like that because then youre entirely dependent on someone on your team having TAG or NARC in order to indirect fire.

I think all you should need to indirect fire is a spotter. But indirect fire should be fairly inaccurate without TAG or NARC. That way you can still indirect fire if someone on your team isnt carrying TAG/NARC.

I would rather Indirect Fire be a nice thing they can do, rather than the focus. (I would also increase LRM speed because they are soo slow they suck at direct engagements.)

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Anyone else dismayed that every "suggestion" to "improve" LRMs is to further exaggerate the exact qualities that make them bad now:

Make spread larger
Make indirect fire even harder
Make them direct fire weapons so they can be inferior to ballistics

It's not even a clever attempt to hide the fact that you just want LRMs removed from the game.

Two thirds (and SRMs) of the weapons in the game are already direct fire...implementing the any of "suggestions" to make them better at direct fire would leave 3 out of 3 (as opposed to our current 2.5 our of 3) weapons in the game all competing to be direct fire.

Lasers - no ammo

Ballistics - less heat, harder to spread damage

SRMS - no benefits over the other two (more heat than ballistics, more spread than lasers, worse range than both)

LRMs - even worse than SRMs (all of the above + require lock time, and much heavier, range still worse than both lasers and ballistcs, and have spread, and can't target components at all)

What ACTUALLY needs to be done is for their indirect firing benefits to be made more apparent.

Increase speed, increase lock on time slightly, tighten spread DRASTICALLY if using narc, tag, or artemis...

Ecm needs to be uber nerfed to ONLY counter narc, tag, and artemis...

But then again, this is only if you actually want 3 different weapons systems.

Otherwise just delete everything LRM from the game, b/c without indirect they're literally pointless.

Edited by The Atlas Overlord, 11 October 2015 - 04:33 PM.

[Livewyr]

The Atlas Overlord, on 11 October 2015 - 04:20 PM, said:

Anyone else dismayed that every "suggestion" to "improve" LRMs is to further exaggerate the exact qualities that make them bad now:

Make spread larger
Make indirect fire even harder
Make them direct fire weapons so they can be inferior to ballistics

It's not even a clever attempt to hide the fact that you just want LRMs removed from the game.

Two thirds of the weapons in the game are already direct fire...

What ACTUALLY needs to be done is for their indirect firing benefits to be made more apparent.

Increase speed, increase lock on time slightly, tighten spread DRASTICALLY if using narc, tag, or artemis...

Ecm needs to be uber nerfed to ONLY counter narc, tag, and artemis...

But then again, this is only if you actually want 3 different weapons systems.

I don't think you could be more wrong if you tried. If you tried.
I love LRMs. I love the concept of LRMs. Indirect fire was my job in the military.

However, I want them to be better in a direct fire capacity (IE, able to hit targets without having to stare at them for 10 minutes) and have indirect fire (where they are invulnerable) be something they can team up to do, and do something that no other weapon in the game can do. Having them just hitch a ride on everyone else's sight with no input just breeds camping noobishness.

[Pjwned]

What you're basically asking is to remove all the ECM mechs released in the last several months, because that's really all that changed.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Livewyr, on 11 October 2015 - 04:34 PM, said:

However, I want them to be better in a direct fire capacity (IE, able to hit targets without having to stare at them for 10 minutes)

Those already exist, those are called SSRMS.

What you're ACTUALLY saying is you want SSRMS to get a massive range buff, and to have their tubes expanded by 10 times.

#rekt

Livewyr, on 11 October 2015 - 04:34 PM, said:

and have indirect fire (where they are invulnerable) be something they can team up to do, and do something that no other weapon in the game can do.

This is LITERALLY.... EXACTLY how they work now.

Edit: I forgot about SSRMs I guess I should update my previous post...

The Atlas Overlord, on 11 October 2015 - 04:20 PM, said:

Anyone else dismayed that every "suggestion" to "improve" LRMs is to further exaggerate the exact qualities that make them bad now:

Make spread larger
Make indirect fire even harder
Make them direct fire weapons so they can be inferior to ballistics

It's not even a clever attempt to hide the fact that you just want LRMs removed from the game.

Two thirds (and SRMs AND SSRMs) of the weapons in the game are already direct fire...implementing the any of "suggestions" to make them better at direct fire would leave 3 out of 3 (as opposed to our current 2.75 our of 3) weapons in the game all competing to be direct fire.

Lasers - no ammo

Ballistics - less heat, harder to spread damage

SRMS - no benefits over the other two (more heat than ballistics, more spread than lasers, worse range than both)

SSRMs - A mix between SRM and LRMs.... all the drawbacks of both... but at least they don't miss.

LRMs - even worse than SRMs (all of the above + require lock time, and much heavier, range still worse than both lasers and ballistcs, and have spread, and can't target components at all)

What ACTUALLY needs to be done is for their indirect firing benefits to be made more apparent.

Increase speed, increase lock on time slightly, tighten spread DRASTICALLY if using narc, tag, or artemis...

Ecm needs to be uber nerfed to ONLY counter narc, tag, and artemis...

But then again, this is only if you actually want 3 different weapons systems.

Otherwise just delete everything LRM from the game, b/c without indirect they're literally pointless.

Edited by The Atlas Overlord, 11 October 2015 - 05:04 PM.

[El Bandito]

Lightfoot, on 11 October 2015 - 10:55 AM, said:

Actually Clan LRMs are worse due to the stream firing. The damage drops off steeply under 180 so that by 100 meters they are doing about 25% damage, it's a trivial ability in MWO. I run ALRM 25 on my Protector, they fire in a big clump and do about double the damage of Clan ALRM 25. Don't worry PGI has nerfed Clan LRMs heavily or you would all be crying LRMs killed me. Sometimes I can't even see an effect from Artemis on Clan LRMs, it seems to work better if the LRMs are fired in a clump.

I test LRMs and Clan LRMs endlessly, run them on some favorite mechs. I know exactly what they do and it's pretty bad for Clan and Inner Sphere. I actually like I.S LRMs better, they at least have a small punch when they hit.

Andi Nagasia, on 11 October 2015 - 11:54 AM, said:

dont agree i think IS LRMs are better,
they can hit harder and arnt killed as easly form AMS as they are in a volley,
they also have less spread, though they are double the Weight,

i think Targeting needs abit of a rework to make them useful then balance from there,

I run LRMs a lot too, and I can tell you that Clan LRM stream firing is much less of an issue due to absolutely tiny number of AMS I am seeing in this game. People foolishly mount one more DHS or 1 ton more ammo than an AMS. Plus its shaking ability really helps the suppression much better. If I can mount Clan LRMs on my non-hyper quirked IS mechs, I would do so in a heartbeat.

Sure both LRMs are not meta, but Clan LRMs are far better to bring along than the tonnage hogging IS ones.
At least one will not regret it as much when the situation arises.

Here are some hard numbers from my LRMs.

LRM10: Accuracy 41.26%, Fired--453345, Damage--197651, Efficiency 0.436

ALRM10: Accuracy 42.02% Fired--93035, Damage--40635, Efficiency 0.437

CLRM10: Accuracy 48.80% Fired--101236, Damage--48423, Efficiency 0.478.

Who cares about stream-firing when it is proven in my case that CLRMs still deal more damage per shot on average? At least 10% more compared to IS LRMs.

Edited by El Bandito, 11 October 2015 - 05:31 PM.

[sycocys]

Khobai, on 11 October 2015 - 03:49 PM, said:

stuff we've been telling them since the first day they release ecm

true story. will it happen? doubtful. I'm just amazed that it only took 2 years for them to figure out ecm was broken, still doubt they'll actually put forth the effort to fix it.

[Fiona Marshe]

The biggest problem I find is the huge parabola for ISLRMs currently. Even when firing directly, the launch at a huge upward angle (soaking a second or two of flight).

When firing with LOS, the angle needs to be a lot flatter (maybe 10 degrees). I'd like my double-helix flight pattern for Artemis launches back as well.

[Kjudoon]

You can fix LRMs with 4 possible routes while never touching the weapon system directly.

1. Direct Fire weapons that are grouped or fire within a very close period get dynamic convergence or cone of fire making them just like an LRM or LBx spread. Do nothing to LRMs. Weapons equalized and become relevant instantly because you cannot do PPFLD and 60+ point alphas to single components anymore.

2. Remove Raderp from the game.

3. Apply AMS and ECM ONLY to the mech that has it mounted.

4. Make Tag invisible and double the range



Or leave the above alone and do a mix of the following to LRMs.

1. Increase speed to that of SRMs or Streaks (200-250m/s). This improves the short game of LRMs while makes the long game worse because reaquiring guidance is harder once lock is broken.

2. Change Ghost heat for LRMs to be the following and not be linked with any other launcher.
LRM5s 4 or more
LRM10s 3 or mor
LRM 15s 3 or more
LRM 20s 2 or more

3. Return splash damage to LRMs at the smallest lowest setting.

4. Make LRMs true fire & forget weapons.


Or the silly solution:

Give all LRMs perfect convergence just like direct fire on a random component, like streaks. So that LRM 40 barrage you just fired, all that make it through the AMS cloud hit the same component.

Edited by Kjudoon, 11 October 2015 - 05:28 PM.

[Ex Atlas Overlord]

Fiona Marshe, on 11 October 2015 - 05:18 PM, said:

The biggest problem I find is the huge parabola for ISLRMs currently. Even when firing directly, the launch at a huge upward angle (soaking a second or two of flight).

When firing with LOS, the angle needs to be a lot flatter (maybe 10 degrees). I'd like my double-helix flight pattern for Artemis launches back as well.

Funny thing no one seems to notice...

LRM minimum range is SUPPOSED to be 180 meters of flight distance.... and maximum range is supposed to be 1000 meters of flight distance.

180 meters fired at 45 degree angle is actually only like 140 or something in a straight line to the target...

And yet you can stand at 184 meters from an enemy and do zero damage with LRMs....

The actual minimum range in game is closer to 190 straight line... which is probably like 250+ flight
distance.

Basic knowledge of algebra and parabolas OP.

Edited by The Atlas Overlord, 11 October 2015 - 05:39 PM.

[Kjudoon]

That's 180m from your CURRENT location to target. Not from where you fired. It's a flaw in the game only noticed when you're firing really close or far away while moving.

And the game does not take actual travel time, angle/trajectory into account at all. It's 180-1000m straight line.

Edited by Kjudoon, 11 October 2015 - 05:40 PM.