11 replies to this topic

[Arctourus]

So, I've enjoyed playing my new archers over the past few days and have read some spirited debates on the forums from those who love, hate or in some way want to see changes made to lrms. A great thread started by Bishop Steiner on the state of lrms made some great points on the functional disparity between small lrm launchers and the larger ones, before the topic eventually dissolved into name calling, bragging, whining and otherwise uncivilized discourse (because hey, it's the MWO forums, what else do you expect?). Amidst the valid discussion on some ways to change the mechanics of lrms to make them a better overall weapons system were the usual cries of lrms being a bad weapon system because they are ineffective quickly followed by complaints that they area a bad weapon system because they are apparently too effective.

So let's be realistic. Like any weapon in the game, they have benefits and drawbacks. Yes, they can either let you fire from cover or require you to risk long periods of face time. Yes, they can mercilessly punish an exposed target or fail to cause a point of damage in the wrong tactical situation. They can be used by new players and experienced players, they can carry a battle if used properly or be a waste of tonnage if used incorrectly. Like any weapon system, they can either hit their target or not depending on the skills of the players targeting and targeted. They have several hard counters in the form of radar deprivation and ECM, and like all weapons, simply using cover effectively renders them harmless.

So, while grinding out my archers the other night, I had the privilege of playing on a decent pug against a team that seemed determined to wander aimlessly around in the open, and thus I punished them. As we mopped up the last few players I saw the most heartwarming of comments from the defeated team.

"NEWBLRMS for the win."

[Thunderbird Anthares]

it is a mark of a warrior to be able to use any tool as effectively for the job as possible, even the ineffective one

well done sir, pound them into the ground

PGI, plzfix

[Paigan]

Arctourus, on 22 March 2016 - 05:09 AM, said:

[...]

These labels are not what that that meme is intended for.

A.K.A.:



On the actual topic: I can't hear it anymore.

YES, newbies tend to use LRMs (and often wrong).
NO, that does NOT mean that everyone using LRMs is automatically a n00b. That is a classic example of a false conclusion (ill logic or simply put "stupidity"). ESPECIALLY not if someone who considers himself a super good player starts flaming "Noob weapon" because he was stupid enough to let himself get lurmed to death.

Edited by Paigan, 22 March 2016 - 05:25 AM.

[Felbombling]

Changes I'd make to LRMs would be as follows...

• Give them flat trajectories in LOS situations, making them in effect direct fire weapons.
  
• Give 50% bonus in damage and C-Bill rewards for Mechs that 'spot' for indirect fire... to get that bonus, the scout cannot have fired their own weapons. Let scouts scout.
  
• Slow down the reload times for the smaller launchers to avoid the stun lock LRM 5 spam.
  
• Assign each 5 point cluster of LRMs a bone, same way Streak SRMs are handled.
  
• More ammo per ton, so that a player doesn't have to boat LRMs to be effective... give them flexibility to take shorter range SRMs or Medium Lasers for backup.

Edited by StaggerCheck, 22 March 2016 - 07:14 AM.

[Raso]

I actually like the idea of giving each set of 5 LRMs a bone like SSRMs. It would give mechs that lack multiple missile hardpoints a bit of viability when using larger LRMs. Maybe have it so each launcher can only target the same bone once so multiplie LRM5s still have a use. Maybe allow the target's own heat generation to effect where a missiles might track to (higher heats means more likely to track the torso).

[DivineEvil]

I only bothered with meaningless 370m range increase LRMs has. In most cases with current stats, LRMs take way too long to reach anything beyond 600-700 meters anyway, so that LRMs would actually be just as fine with their TT 630m range as now. At the same time, this very range buff makes any further improvements game-breaking, particularly adjusting their flight speed will dramatically increase the effective range closer to the 1000m. That means, that cutting away from that extra range would allow several ways to make LRMs more reliable, without breaking the balance.

Most of all, the earlier mentioned by @StaggerCheck feature of flat flight trajectory. LRMs are long-range weapon with indirect-fire capability, but it is not an artillery weapon. It would not be even hard to program for, because direct LoS situations are already accounted for to adjust for Artemis accuracy and tracking bonuses.

In perfect scenario, PGi can reduce the maximum range, then increase the missile velocity, make LRMs fired flat when targeting visible targets, including dumb-fire, and perhaps make lock-on a little bit harder to keep spam at bay. That might get LRMs to a bit better direct-combat shape. There's plenty of actual valid artillery battlemech weapons, that MWO still does not acquired. LRMs do not need to replace them.

[Arctourus]

wow, never had someone call incorrect meme usage before.

Edited by Arctourus, 22 March 2016 - 09:41 AM.

[Thunderbird Anthares]

theres a first time for everything

he wasnt wrong tho, gotta brush up on that meme-fu

[Arctourus]

not really, I just chose that one over the conan ones in the google image search cuz I liked it better.

Meme definition: A meme (/ˈmiːm/ meem)[1] is "an idea, behavior, or style that spreads from person to person within a culture".[2] A meme acts as a unit for carrying cultural ideas, symbols, or practices that can be transmitted from one mind to another through writing, speech, gestures, rituals, or other imitable phenomena with a mimicked theme. Supporters of the concept regard memes as cultural analogues to genes in that they self-replicate, mutate, and respond to selective pressures.

not meant to be static, but designed to mutate across cultural references.

[ILikePeaches]

This is why whenever I see people QQ about how nerfed LRMs are I laugh. It's hilarious to see threads both clamoring for the nerf and buff of LRMs which apparently are heat seeking death bees or bubble launchers. Seems like some vocal people really just want their weapon or mech of choice to be routinely successful for them.

[Lynx7725]

ILikePeaches, on 22 March 2016 - 05:13 PM, said:

This is why whenever I see people QQ about how nerfed LRMs are I laugh. It's hilarious to see threads both clamoring for the nerf and buff of LRMs which apparently are heat seeking death bees or bubble launchers. Seems like some vocal people really just want their weapon or mech of choice to be routinely successful for them.

People just like to have a "I WIN" button.

Guess what -- you can have that with LRMs. Only problem is, it's a random chance of appearing in any given game. Against teams of people who swagger out in the open while in teams that know how to lock up, LRMs are like a "I WIN" button. Against teams who know how to move from cover to cover efficiently and how to harasses the enemy back line, LRMs are like a "I lose button".

If you want to be consistently good in anything, you have to do it until you become good at it. Not many short cuts, and this applies to LRMs too. Noobs can get lucky in any one match -- you don't see the next ten that they get smashed in the face when they go up against someone who knows what they are doing. I take some perverse pride in using my LRMs to take out an opposing LRM boat, particularly when it's obvious the guy doesn't know what he was doing.

[Alardus]

Lynx undersands.