94 replies to this topic

[Sader325]

LRM Explanation followed by 3 LRM matches. Long video, watch if you want, or don't.

[Agent 0 Fortune]

;TLDR

[Novakaine]

Novakaine approves this theory.

[Sader325]

Agent 0 Fortune, on 24 June 2016 - 06:35 PM, said:

;TLDR

That first sentence was pretty daunting I agree.

[Bluefalcon13]

Watched most of it. Had to write it off cause my only lurm mech I play has 2 missle hard points (founder-pult).

I may have to try this on some of my Mad Dogs if I ever get around to playing them again. Never really considered the speed much, but it makes sense! Thanks for the video!

[Navid A1]

Finally someone who gets it.

I've been yelling for too long that LRM15s and 20s are useless.
PGI should just give them the same spread as LRM5 already.

Now to add to that... in closed beta there was a time when LRMs had spalsh damage and a flight pattern that made taking cover impossible...
PGI nerfed LRMs to oblivion first... and after some time fixed the flight pattern and removed splash damage.


With the main reasons behind Lurmocalypse gone...here we are 3 years after, wating for PGI to un-F* the lrms.

Edited by Navid A1, 24 June 2016 - 07:32 PM.

[Scout Derek]

Good video, one of the more needed tutorials on LRMs. LRMs 15-20 do need to be shappened up in terms of usefulness. LRM 5s have the best cone of fire than any LRM, not to mention they take up the least tonnage and can do a better job than the others. Easy to counter with AMS, but who brings AMS these days? Probably the dedicated groups, but that's about it, rarely will you see AMS in Solo ques because people don't like losing their tonnage possibly if the equipment they bring isn't going to do them good. There's always a rock to hide behind...

Again, good video.

[Sader325]

Procurator Derek, on 24 June 2016 - 07:40 PM, said:

Good video, one of the more needed tutorials on LRMs. LRMs 15-20 do need to be shappened up in terms of usefulness. LRM 5s have the best cone of fire than any LRM, not to mention they take up the least tonnage and can do a better job than the others. Easy to counter with AMS, but who brings AMS these days? Probably the dedicated groups, but that's about it, rarely will you see AMS in Solo ques because people don't like losing their tonnage possibly if the equipment they bring isn't going to do them good. There's always a rock to hide behind...

Again, good video.

There's an easy fix.

Clan LRM 10, 15 and 20 should have the same exact spread as LRM 5's.

and IS LRM 10, 15 and 20 should fire in volleys of 5's. Suddenly it becomes worth it to use more tonnage for bigger launchers.

[Xetelian]

LRM20 should be as effective as 4 LRM5s
LRM10 should be as effective as 2 LRM5s

There should be some differences but they really need to normalize the LRMs across the board.

[Andi Nagasia]

Sader325, on 24 June 2016 - 07:42 PM, said:

There's an easy fix.

Clan LRM 10, 15 and 20 should have the same exact spread as LRM 5's.

and IS LRM 10, 15 and 20 should fire in volleys of 5's. Suddenly it becomes worth it to use more tonnage for bigger launchers.

Has been Stated Countless times by You, Bishop, me and Others,
i just Tweeted Russ the Video, hopefully it sheds some light on this for them,

[Scout Derek]

Sader325, on 24 June 2016 - 07:42 PM, said:

There's an easy fix.

Clan LRM 10, 15 and 20 should have the same exact spread as LRM 5's.

and IS LRM 10, 15 and 20 should fire in volleys of 5's. Suddenly it becomes worth it to use more tonnage for bigger launchers.

A good fix, however we shouldn't be quick to dismiss the fact that if we have the same cone for the clan 20 as the clan 5, you suddenly start obsoleting the 5.


Maybe make it so:

Clan LRM 20 has 15% Less cone of fire efficiency of Clan LRM 5

Clan LRM has 10% Less cone of fire efficiency of Clan LRM 5

Clan LRM has 7.5% Less cone of fire efficiency of Clan LRM 5

Because let's be honest; There's going to be a group of people who, will come out of nowhere and complain. But, as they say, you can't satisfy everyone. What do you think of this?

(Sorry for late response, Was at store getting some Vitamins and Bathroom supplies)

[Sader325]

Procurator Derek, on 24 June 2016 - 08:57 PM, said:

A good fix, however we shouldn't be quick to dismiss the fact that if we have the same cone for the clan 20 as the clan 5, you suddenly start obsoleting the 5.


Maybe make it so:

Clan LRM 20 has 15% Less cone of fire efficiency of Clan LRM 5

Clan LRM has 10% Less cone of fire efficiency of Clan LRM 5

Clan LRM has 7.5% Less cone of fire efficiency of Clan LRM 5

Because let's be honest; There's going to be a group of people who, will come out of nowhere and complain. But, as they say, you can't satisfy everyone. What do you think of this?

(Sorry for late response, Was at store getting some Vitamins and Bathroom supplies)

The thing is LRM 5's are literally on the edge of usefulness. Anything that doesn't have their spread isn't worth it.

The benefit of LRM 5's is their cooldown, and thats an edge enough. A LRM 5 has a 3.5 cooldown, and LRM 15 has 5.5 cooldown and LRM 20 has 6.5 cooldown.

So, I would propose this to differentiate them a bit more.

Give LRM 5's a 30% velocity difference over LRM 20's.

So basicly:

LRM 20 - No velocity boost.

LRM 15 - 10% velocity boost.

LRM 10 - 20% velocity boost.

LRM 5 - 30% velocity boost.

LRM 5's = Low cooldown high velocity. Uses more hardpoints and more heat. (8 heat for 20 damage currently)

LRM 20 = High Cooldown Low Velocity. Uses less hardpoints and less heat. (6 heat for 20 damage currently).

Edited by Sader325, 24 June 2016 - 09:14 PM.

[Xetelian]

Procurator Derek, on 24 June 2016 - 08:57 PM, said:

A good fix, however we shouldn't be quick to dismiss the fact that if we have the same cone for the clan 20 as the clan 5, you suddenly start obsoleting the 5.


Maybe make it so:

Clan LRM 20 has 15% Less cone of fire efficiency of Clan LRM 5

Clan LRM has 10% Less cone of fire efficiency of Clan LRM 5

Clan LRM has 7.5% Less cone of fire efficiency of Clan LRM 5

Because let's be honest; There's going to be a group of people who, will come out of nowhere and complain. But, as they say, you can't satisfy everyone. What do you think of this?

(Sorry for late response, Was at store getting some Vitamins and Bathroom supplies)

You don't really obsolete the LRM5 if they have different cooldowns. Also, the 5 should be taken by lighter mechs, mechs that wouldn't bring a 20 when they could, like light mechs and medium mechs, the bigger you are the bigger your launcher would be is a fine line to walk.


Also, it would be beneficial for mechs to have their tube counts adjusted. The poor AS7 RS has 10 and 6 tubes, the STK had 6s and 10s too. This is pretty heinous for an assault mech.

Edited by Xetelian, 24 June 2016 - 09:08 PM.

[Sader325]

Xetelian, on 24 June 2016 - 09:07 PM, said:

You don't really obsolete the LRM5 if they have different cooldowns. Also, the 5 should be taken by lighter mechs, mechs that wouldn't bring a 20 when they could, like light mechs and medium mechs, the bigger you are the bigger your launcher would be is a fine line to walk.


Also, it would be beneficial for mechs to have their tube counts adjusted. The poor AS7 RS has 10 and 6 tubes, the STK had 6s and 10s too. This is pretty heinous for an assault mech.

Changing IS LRM's to a 5 missile volley system would get rid of the tube shenanigans since you would only be firing 5 missiles at once. The LRM 20 with 5 missile volleys would be fired in pretty rapid succession, so that the chain size would be about the same size as a clan LRM 20 stream.

Edited by Sader325, 24 June 2016 - 09:12 PM.

[Scout Derek]

Sader325, on 24 June 2016 - 09:06 PM, said:

The thing is LRM 5's are literally on the edge of usefulness. Anything that doesn't have their spread isn't worth it.

The benefit of LRM 5's is their cooldown, and thats an edge enough. A LRM 5 has a 3.5 cooldown, and LRM 15 has 5.5 cooldown and LRM 20 has 6.5 cooldown.

So, I would propose this to differentiate them a bit more.

Give LRM 5's a 30% velocity difference over LRM 20's.

So basicly:

LRM 20 - No velocity boost.

LRM 15 - 10% velocity boost.

LRM 10 - 20% velocity boost.

LRM 5 - 30% velocity boost.

LRM 5's = Low cooldown high velocity. Uses more hardpoints and more heat. (8 heat for 20 damage currently)

LRM 20 = High Cooldown Low Velocity. Uses less hardpoints and less heat. (6 heat for 20 damage currently).

That would be a good way.to balance them, considering that a lighter launcher should be able to launch its Missiles faster than a larger launcher.

So you either get smaller, faster, and hotter LRMs, or you get the bigger, slower, less hot LRMs.

Now, we would have to worry about the mechs with +Missile Velocity quirks, considering if a mech gets +20% Missile velocity, or even a 10%, 40% Missile Velocity is mind of scary, if you don't have AMS, even with Radar Deprivation, you've got LRMs that can hit you within 2-5 Seconds if you're within 400-600M of them. (I could be wrong about the speed and time they come at you though).

Sader325, on 24 June 2016 - 09:11 PM, said:

Changing IS LRM's to a 5 missile volley system would get rid of the tube shenanigans since you would only be firing 5 missiles at once. The LRM 20 with 5 missile volleys would be fired in pretty rapid succession, so that the chain size would be about the same size as a clan LRM 20 stream.

Probably a .3 Second Delay from each volley, right? Guessing because you didn't specify the delay time.

[Sader325]

Procurator Derek, on 24 June 2016 - 09:26 PM, said:

That would be a good way.to balance them, considering that a lighter launcher should be able to launch its Missiles faster than a larger launcher.

So you either get smaller, faster, and hotter LRMs, or you get the bigger, slower, less hot LRMs.

Now, we would have to worry about the mechs with +Missile Velocity quirks, considering if a mech gets +20% Missile velocity, or even a 10%, 40% Missile Velocity is mind of scary, if you don't have AMS, even with Radar Deprivation, you've got LRMs that can hit you within 2-5 Seconds if you're within 400-600M of them. (I could be wrong about the speed and time they come at you though).



Probably a .3 Second Delay from each volley, right? Guessing because you didn't specify the delay time.

With these buffs you would probably start by dequirking all missile mechs until you see whether they need them or not. The volley delay would be subject to testing, but it should be fairly fast.

[smokytehbear]

Xetelian, on 24 June 2016 - 08:03 PM, said:

LRM20 should be as effective as 4 LRM5s
LRM10 should be as effective as 2 LRM5s

There should be some differences but they really need to normalize the LRMs across the board.

This is what I would like to see. Nothing about the missile is changing, so why is any of it different? If anything at all, 4 LRM5s at different locations on the mech should naturally have worse spread because they're coming out at different points, whereas a single LRM20 rack should be pretty uniform.

I understand ACs getting stronger, slower, and having more reload time the larger the bore, I just don't get it when it comes to launchers. Might be pressing the issue, but I'd honestly like to see Artemis considered a mech-wide expense too, sort of like a T-comp or Command Console works where you pay a flat tonnage fee up front and it just helps with all missiles. Again, makes more sense at least to me.

I'm sure it's probably the way it is for TT reasons, but eh, just weighing in.

[SnafuSnafu]

AKA adobo777 on twitch/NGNG TS/NGNG Discord

I 100% agree that LRM5 is probably the most effective LRM pound per pound, there are many caveats however with different mechs, I would really like to do a thorough investigation on this and I may do a counterpoint video with tests results that I've done in the past that I've sadly kept to myself ( heard the forum was cancer, thus been avoiding at all cost ).

I do a lot of LRM builds and my primary mech is actually a hybrid Warhawk Charlie with 3x LRM15-ART (1440 rounds), 5x medium pulse with tag, which I've found to be one of the best LRM mech in most situation.

Edited by SnafuSnafu, 25 June 2016 - 12:04 AM.

[Navid A1]

While we are at it.... lets not forget velocity.

Right now,LRMs take too long to get past 600m. Their effective range is 1000m.

So why not make them act like real missiles?
The velocity should increase the longer they travel.

Something like this old mock up:

[Scout Derek]

Navid A1, on 25 June 2016 - 01:22 AM, said:

While we are at it.... lets not forget velocity.

Right now,LRMs take too long to get past 600m. Their effective range is 1000m.

So why not make them act like real missiles?
The velocity should increase the longer they travel.

Something like this old mock up:

Interesting, just one, slight problem.

How do you explain the fact that they don't go slower when arcing up, but yet they speed up while arcing down?

See what I mean? It's flawed, but not entirely. If they could code it to increase velocity on the downside, it'd make more sense.

Because downward forces applies in physics for projectiles, no?