151 replies to this topic

[PhoenixFire55]

El Bandito, on 27 June 2016 - 11:18 AM, said:

I don't even have to reply to you. Your sorry excuse of a post is already drawing condemnations from the others.

Apparently you don't understand or don't want to understand the point about other weapons being just as situational as LRMs or even more so. Also, I really hoped that I wouldn't need to use [/sarcasm] tags in our discussion, but guess I was wrong after all.

But feel free to think whatever you like and keep crying how bad your lurms are.

[Weeny Machine]

1453 R, on 27 June 2016 - 12:56 PM, said:

PSA For Everyone

Please stop suggesting "Locks/indirect only happens with TAG/NARC". it's a dumb idea.

For one, it's very, very easy for TAG/NARC to lose lock halfway through a salvo, in which case your LRMs are no longer acting the same way they did when they left the tubes. If the missile have drastically different performance envelopes with or without TAG/NARC, and are able to change between these profiles mid-flight, then your weapon is highly unreliable and generally useless. And also problematical and prone to code glitches, given the ambiguous nature of its functionality and its ability to decide at any point for any reason to use whichever behavior you're not currently hoping for.

For two, TAG cannot be used the way it's 'intended' to be used, as it is utterly suicidal for any 'spotter' to stand somewhere and stare at a target whilst projecting a constant "COOKIE HERE" location beacon. TAG desperately needs a rework - either the beam is invisible to enemies, or TAG becomes a duration/cooldown weapon which grants something like 5s of bonus if the entire 'burntime' of the beam (prolly 0.25s, or somewhere thereabouts) hits the target. Otherwise you will never convince people to spot for your idiotic bloatboat supersalvos for you. And NARC? Yeah, good luck hitting with a NARC projectile outside 200m range. At which point you're already out of position for LRMs.

All these suggestions keep saying "work with spotters to achieve LRM locks/indirect fire or suck it up and go direct like you bloody well should"...save most of them also neglect to come up with ways that LRM direct fire becomes not utterly awful, nor comes up with ways for spotters to survive spotting for LRMs, nor does it account for the fact that spotters and LRM machines finding each other in queue is a dicey proposition at the best of times.

Every other weapon in MWO is self-contained. SRMs don't need you to bring an AC/2 to mark the target as SRM bait. Lasers don't need you to bring a slew of machine guns to spew heat bullets to cool them off. LRMs which are incapable of functioning effectively without a second 'Mech bringing a rare subset of gear which does not benefit the second 'Mech itself in any way are LRMs no one should have to deal with.

Think your suggestions through, just a little bit, before suggesting them.

Let me clarify the point about TAG:
The speed of the missile doesn't changed locked or not. So the perfomance issue isn't that dramatic.

As for other fancy complicated mechanics: we talk about PGI. Keep it short and simple

[PhoenixFire55]

Revis Volek, on 27 June 2016 - 10:40 AM, said:

Getting close to killing something ISNT killing it. LRM are bad at killing things most the time and the name of this game is to KILL the other 12 mechs on the field.

True. And thats why I tell my lurm-friends in PUGs to divide their total damage by 4 to get their effective damage.

However, this is also true for all laservomit, because any semi-capable opponent will spread the laser (and especially so clan laser) damage by moving, torso twisting and jumping into his arms, legs and all torsoes. It is harder to spread pulse laser damage, but pulse lasers have much shorter range, and that is their balancing factor, just like much bigger heat is a balancing factor for pinpoint PPC.

As I've said, LRMs, just like any weapon, have their pros and cons. They are indeed relatively ineffective in terms of total damage they take to kill a mech, but people should consider other factors like total tonnage of these weapons, or total heat produced to kill a mech, range, lock on and such.

You can argue how ineffective they are all you want, but would you argue that an LRM boat is more effective on Polar or Alpine than an SRM boat? I don't think so, and thats because as I've said many times all weapons are situational. Maps are a huge factor in terms of determining what weapons are best in each situation, but most of our maps tend to be of the same kind. Give us a completely open map with no cover and we'll see about how "broken" LRMs are.

[totgeboren]

PhoenixFire55, on 28 June 2016 - 12:16 AM, said:

Tag and Artemis help with all that. Plus, if you payed attention I have more than just LRMs on the build I used.

I have played lots of LRM boats, I basically never field one without TAG. I know how to play them, and often get good results.
I was simply making a point, that 10 tones of LRM10 missiles were only enough to destroy one stationary Atlas, 1 stationary Catapult and cripple one stationary Cataphract.
Against all these reduced spread would be helpful, but lock on speed and strength makes no difference, since the targets were stationary.

10 tones of ammo with any other weapon is enough to likely destroy at least 12 mechs is they are stationary, even if you don't use headshots.

[Nightshade24]

Egg Fu, on 26 June 2016 - 11:09 AM, said:

Every once in a while I see somebody boating LRM but also holding their own tag laser on the target as they're launching. I respect those guys a lot more than those who just hide expecting everyone else to hold lock. Share some armor with the group.

Shoot a narc into an enemy and then hold a tag on them and your LRM's will hold much tighter groups thus doing legit damage.

Sorry, no pity for those who don't.

To me I'm quite the obvious. They are trying to pretend they do not even have a team and ignore the scouts, spotters, etc who try to spot, hold, NARC, and TAG for them meanwhile they are going into unecesary danger just to TAG a non vital mech in LOS. To me those LRM boaters that work with the team and know when to and not to expose themselfs and when to fire behind cover and not.

Allowing those that are equipped to do the spotting such as the Raven with NARC and ECM or that cicada keeping TAG contact will be far more effective then you trying to do it yourself for both you and them- it puts both of you out of unnecessary danger and rewards both well (more the spotter then LRM boater, however the LRM boater would contribute more to the match)

[totgeboren]

Nightshade24, on 28 June 2016 - 01:45 AM, said:

To me I'm quite the obvious. They are trying to pretend they do not even have a team and ignore the scouts, spotters, etc who try to spot, hold, NARC, and TAG for them meanwhile they are going into unecesary danger just to TAG a non vital mech in LOS. To me those LRM boaters that work with the team and know when to and not to expose themselfs and when to fire behind cover and not.

Allowing those that are equipped to do the spotting such as the Raven with NARC and ECM or that cicada keeping TAG contact will be far more effective then you trying to do it yourself for both you and them- it puts both of you out of unnecessary danger and rewards both well (more the spotter then LRM boater, however the LRM boater would contribute more to the match)

In PUG games it's entirely unrealistic to expect others to field TAG/NARC and Advanced Target Decay if they don't themselves use LRMS.
Firing LRMS at other peoples locks means those missiles will just hit dirt, since most use Radar derp. The spotter can keep a lock for say 3-4 seconds, while it takes a second or two to get a lock, and then around 4-5 sec for the missiles to travel to the target. Far longer than those 3-4 sec before the target breaks los.

[Stone Wall]

Trauglodyte, on 26 June 2016 - 12:53 PM, said:

LRMs are a really polarizing weapon system. The bulk of the people that play this game are bad. LRMs lend themselves to being bad, by design, which makes bad players using bad LRMs badly even worse. I watched someone play a game last night that fired half of his/her volleys into the wall next to him/her and didn't change their positioning at all. They just kept ripple volleying LRM10 after LRM10 right into a wall. I've seen people chain fire LRMs into mountains, buildings, friendly players and not do anything. I don't know how many games I've played where someone starts off the match with, "Press R and I'll blah blah blah".

That being said, LRMs have a place in this game but not how they're currently designed. Indirect fire is a crutch that too many people rely upon while the LRM itself is a horrible face tank weapon that can be neutered 5 or 6 different ways. Yet, after 4 years of this game, people still come to the board complaining about LRMs being OP. The problem is that if you make LRMs really good, the boaters will obliterate the opponents and we're back to the LRMpocalypse version whatever again. If you keep them in their current state, like 1% of the people will use them correctly while the rest of the underhive stupids will continue to dry hump the doorknob.

I understand your hate for LRMs, but calling people who use them bad is just funny. I've been playing MW since 1996 and currently in MWO I use either lasers or LRMs. I'm a very skilled player in MW. You can't blame new people for playing 2 or 3 matches, getting stomped in the open, then switching to LRMs during the beginning of their MW life.

And then you go on to say that if LRMs get buffed, everyone will lose to them. No, the bad pilots will lose to them. There is SO much cover to hide behind, even in the open maps. You would have to be playing like a new pilot to get stomped by them or have a team who wants to hide vs confront 2 or 3 boats.

Not to mention the LRMs in this game are underpowered compared to past games. They deserve buffs, but will never be on the scale of MW3. But neither will this game.

The only reason LRMpocalypse was a thing was because alot of people who started playing this game were new. They thought they could Master Chief solo a win. "Oh, I bet if I run to the enemy first I will get the first kill. Who needs a team?"

[Nightshade24]

totgeboren, on 28 June 2016 - 01:58 AM, said:

In PUG games it's entirely unrealistic to expect others to field TAG/NARC and Advanced Target Decay if they don't themselves use LRMS. Firing LRMS at other peoples locks means those missiles will just hit dirt, since most use Radar derp. The spotter can keep a lock for say 3-4 seconds, while it takes a second or two to get a lock, and then around 4-5 sec for the missiles to travel to the target. Far longer than those 3-4 sec before the target breaks los.

And? most things in MW: O is dependent on others which may or may not be available. Like being a juggernaut or brawler with no snipers or LRM boats around to support at range, LRM boat with no light mechs to quickly intercept enemy lights and mediums, no brawlers for the long range mechs to rely on for support in their weak ranges... etc.

The first point is as applicable as any other problem with any other role. In most cases slapping a NARC or TAG onto the LRM boat is the same as slapping an AC 20 to your sniper or an ER PPC to your brawler to try to do the thing that a team mate should have been doing all along.

And radar dep doesn't matter, an LRM boat can have target reten which against a dep opponent goes back to normal: cancels out... and most often nearly every enemy doesn't have radar dep from my personal experience of seeing them break LOS and go into cover and stuff while previously targeted.

[totgeboren]

Nightshade24, on 28 June 2016 - 04:01 AM, said:

And radar dep doesn't matter, an LRM boat can have target reten which against a dep opponent goes back to normal: cancels out... and most often nearly every enemy doesn't have radar dep from my personal experience of seeing them break LOS and go into cover and stuff while previously targeted.

Target Retention only works if you yourself have acquired the target, Artemis only works with los and TAG requires los.
Can you spot the trend?

[PhoenixFire55]

totgeboren, on 28 June 2016 - 04:22 AM, said:

Target Retention only works if you yourself have acquired the target, Artemis only works with los and TAG requires los.
Can you spot the trend?

Yeah, game basically says "Stop hiding and go lock your own targets". In capital letters.

[PhoenixFire55]

totgeboren, on 27 June 2016 - 09:04 AM, said:

Just today I tried a Catapult with 4xLRM10 in the testing grounds. Tourmaline, I placed myself 200 m from the Atlas, facing it head on. This is really as good as it gets, big target and close range.
But look, a few of the missiles hit the ground behind the Atlas! (Though most do hit.)

A Quad LRM15 does not do 60 dmg to anything in one salvo, because the spread is bigger than even the largest mech.
Using 10 tons of ammo, I managed to destroy the Atlas, the Catapult and cripple the Cataphract (though not destroy it), with 1800 missiles against stationary targets using the LRM10, who has got a semi-ok spread.

I call complete BS on this and here is proof ...

https://youtu.be/c0V4Wej32EM

2xALRM10+TAG. 10 tons of ammo. Took out all 8 mechs on testing grounds with some whooping 240 missiles left to spare. Different distances to targets etc. Also note my amazing heat managing / aiming skillz.

[totgeboren]

PhoenixFire55, on 28 June 2016 - 07:27 AM, said:

I call complete BS on this and here is proof ...

https://youtu.be/c0V4Wej32EM

2xALRM10+TAG. 10 tons of ammo. Took out all 8 mechs on testing grounds with some whooping 240 missiles left to spare. Different distances to targets etc. Also note my amazing heat managing / aiming skillz.

I said I used LRM10. No Art nor TAG. The Atlas was straight from the front (200 m away), the Catapult was just by turning around, and the Cataphract was slightly from the side.
Of course, I do have a TAG and in real fights I try to use that as much as possible (on my C4 I have 4xLRM10, no Art), but people who are complaining about indirect fire need to get some perspective on just how weak it is.

Using Art+TAG+los on stationary targets that don't shoot back is about as pointless as it gets. Yay, your mech can take out discos. Too bad every other weapon in the game is better at that too.

Edited by totgeboren, 28 June 2016 - 07:52 AM.

[Thorqemada]

My ALRM10 have a 31.27 % accuracy,
My LRM10 have a 31.36 % accuracy,


For me the only LRM really better with Artenis are C-LRM that hit 5% better with Artemis than without at all sizes.

But i dont Superboat - i often use a single LRM Weapon for tactical/fun use and at most 2x ALRM15 on the Catapult.
I have read some Pilots with some Superboat-Mechs manage to get 45% accuracy.

[PhoenixFire55]

totgeboren, on 28 June 2016 - 07:45 AM, said:

I said I used LRM10. No Art nor TAG. The Atlas was straight from the front (200 m away), the Catapult was just by turning around, and the Cataphract was slightly from the side.
Of course, I do have a TAG and in real fights I try to use that as much as possible (but on my C4 I have 4xLRM10, no Art), but people who are complaining about indirect fire need to get some perspective on just how weak it is.

How about you get some perspective on what you are doing wrong and why your LRMs are so weak? Hint hint, LoS.

totgeboren, on 28 June 2016 - 07:45 AM, said:

Using Art+TAG+los on stationary targets that don't shoot back is about as pointless as it gets. Yay, your mech can take out discos. Too bad every other weapon in the game is better at that too.

Well, fyi, unlike all direct fire weapons, it is equally easy/difficult to take out stationary and moving targets with LRMs. And torso twisting works for damage spreading with direct fire weapons as well.

[totgeboren]

PhoenixFire55, on 28 June 2016 - 07:56 AM, said:

How about you get some perspective on what you are doing wrong and why your LRMs are so weak? Hint hint, LoS.

Well, fyi, unlike all direct fire weapons, it is equally easy/difficult to take out stationary and moving targets with LRMs. And torso twisting works for damage spreading with direct fire weapons as well.

FYI, you might benefit from reading the name of the poster you are responding to.
http://mwomercs.com/...ost__p__5264796

The entire point of my example what to show just how good the LRM10 firing indirectly is, which is emulated in the testing ground by not using Art nor TAG. And it's not good at all is all I'm saying.
They can work as direct fire weapons, but then you really need to ask yourself why you are using LRMs if you are after direct fire weapons? Lasers are much much easier to hit with for example.

Edited by totgeboren, 28 June 2016 - 08:14 AM.

[Navid A1]

PhoenixFire55, on 28 June 2016 - 04:57 AM, said:

Yeah, game basically says "Stop hiding and go lock your own targets". In capital letters.

Yeah, i do that often... it requires much much more skill than using any other weapon.... to keep your tag on them while avoiding their fire.

The problem is that my LRMs take 3 seconds to reach the target and the target receives a warning, and at the end no more than half my missiles actually hit.

If you are using LRM20s, then the target does not even care...

I'm going to bet that you have never tried an LRM boat with tag trying to keep los. I suggest you try it before giving any opinions.

[Mystere]

This thread is still going on?

For crying out loud, just double LRM velocity already, and if that is not enough, double it again.

Still not enough? Then remove that obnoxious incoming missile warning.

Edited by Mystere, 28 June 2016 - 08:21 AM.

[PhoenixFire55]

Navid A1, on 28 June 2016 - 08:14 AM, said:

blah blah blah ...

I'm going to bet that you have never tried an LRM boat with tag trying to keep los. I suggest you try it before giving any opinions.

And I suggest you read the discussion you are posting in before making dumb posts.
Two pages back.

[PhoenixFire55]

totgeboren, on 28 June 2016 - 08:12 AM, said:

The entire point of my example what to show just how good the LRM10 firing indirectly is, which is emulated in the testing ground by not using Art nor TAG. And it's not good at all is all I'm saying.
They can work as direct fire weapons, but then you really need to ask yourself why you are using LRMs if you are after direct fire weapons? Lasers are much much easier to hit with for example.

You know this is about as stupid as it gets. I might as well start proving how ineffective IS MLs are while shooting them from 700m away. IS LBX10 is an amazing weapon ... at ~100m ranges, and even tho it has max range of 1620m nobody in their mind is going to use it at 1620m. You always have an option, nobody forces you to launch indirectly, but if you do your efficiency suffers, much like when shooting direct fire weapons beyond their optimal range.

Mystere, on 28 June 2016 - 08:15 AM, said:

This thread is still going on?

For crying out loud, just double LRM velocity already, and if that is not enough, double it again.

Still not enough? Then remove that obnoxious incoming missile warning.

Why bother? Just make an insta-win module. You press the button, enemy dies. gg

[Mystere]

PhoenixFire55, on 28 June 2016 - 08:28 AM, said:

Why bother? Just make an insta-win module. You press the button, enemy dies. gg

Why are people terrifed of significantly increased LRM velocity? It's not as if PGI is capable of creating complex mechanics to make LRMs better and "balanced" at the same time.

Sometimes, simple solutions are better.