151 replies to this topic

[wanderer]

(Note: The following is partially tongue-in-cheek, but the suggested fixes aren't.)

Dear PGI Lotsa-lurm-lobbers,

First off, I'm a long, LONG time user of the Piranha Long Range Missile Launchers. If I had children, I'd probably name one of them Itano because face it, nine months for your personal missile launcher to reach target is probably about right for these things.

First, about the speed downgrades. My launcher takes the scenic tour getting to it's targets, even more so because apparently a rocket going at 175 was breaking the speed limit so you cranked them down to a glacial 160.

Meanwhile, a NARC capable of hitting at 600m+ is considered slow when fired at a velocity of -500-. Let's do some simple math here. If an LRM traveling 160m/sec is fired at a target 1000m away, how long does it take to arrive at it's station?

Answer:

Spoiler

6.5 seconds, although "way too freaking long to actually hit anyone intelligent" is a valid answer too.

This results in a weapon with a stated range of 1000m that in fact, probably is only useful inside 600m and actually reasonably accurate inside 400m. Clearly, something got broken in the PLRM propulsion system.

Simple fix: Increase LRM velocity to at least 200, which at least cuts travel time down to a maximum of 5 seconds at extreme range. Velocity increase has greater effects at longer ranges in terms of accuracy improvement, pushing the outer limits of effectiveness further.

Second, about the guidance system. LRM 5s seem to come installed with a great one- reasonably hitting a target in the chest if they aren't dashing around too much and facing you. For some reason (maybe to save on production costs?) the PLRM 10, 15, and 20 get increasingly cheap ones, causing them to put larger and larger numbers of missiles into anything BUT where an LRM 5 goes. LRM 15's and 20's are guaranteed to miss a stationary target completely with some of their missiles, never mind a moving one. Clearly, something got broken in the PLRM guidance systems.

Simple fix: change the spread numbers for LRM 15-20 launchers to match the LRM 10, and possibly bump the spread slightly wider for LRM 5s.

Third, for a "smart" weapon system, it has this nagging problem when fired in enclosed spaces. It automatically fires itself into the nearest patch of ceiling. Aside from having to dodge the resulting falling rocks, it doesn't do much to the actual thing I'm aiming at. Sure, I know I can't override the tracking mode, but at least fire the darn things in a straight line when I don't use the lock-on system. For that matter, it'll fire into roofs if it's in lock-on mode on a target that's clearly in cover- and my PLRMs are horrible at anti-terrain effects.

Simple fix: LRMs fired without a lock travel in a straight line, much like SRMs..

Repeated notes having really had no responses lately, I figured I'd put this public one up and see if anyone in the company notices. While I'm sure you could scrap the entire system and start over, I figure simple fixes like this will make things better without having to rebuild the PLRMs from zero.

Thanks muchly from one of your best customers (I can't count how many PLRM launchers I've bought, never mind the ammo!),

Wanderer

[cazidin]

You don't. LRMs and Machine Guns will forever stay terrible and mostly useless weapons. Be thankful that PPCs are half-way decent again.

[Chuck Jager]

My opinion, if somebody can (I mean has the option) to do damage while never exposing their mech, they deserve less than what they are getting now.

I have seen very good lrm boats who fight with the pack, but the option is still there. Players who consistently use this option, do not help in wins as much as they contribute to losses. I do not wanna see anything that enables folks who could not make scorekeeper on a sports team.

At some point, folks need to learn how to be an aggressive force on their team instead of "wow look at my high damage that I got while others did the hard work".

[wanderer]

Chuck Jager, on 26 June 2016 - 10:31 AM, said:

My opinion, if somebody can (I mean has the option) to do damage while never exposing their mech, they deserve less than what they are getting now.

I have seen very good lrm boats who fight with the pack, but the option is still there. Players who consistently use this option, do not help in wins as much as they contribute to losses. I do not wanna see anything that enables folks who could not make scorekeeper on a sports team.

At some point, folks need to learn how to be an aggressive force on their team instead of "wow look at my high damage that I got while others did the hard work".

Strangely enough, I don't end up with a pristine 'Mech (frequently, it's missing parts or dead- XL engine to carry any reasonable ammo load, natch) in fights for some reason. Artemis takes having LOS to function, after all- part of why scrub players packing large LRM launchers are so terrible. Indirect mode is maximum spread. Aggressiveness is key pretty much to any match if you're actually going to be competent with missiles- getting close, getting your locks if possible, keeping a steady stream of fire either way.

People who parasitically use team locks only are generally incompetent with a launcher. Making LRMs decent for good players isn't going to change scrubby players in the least.

And tell me- what the heck does bad players have to do with why a weapon is bad? I see people sniping with lasers past their range, standing in place in the middle of an open field while I pour missiles into them, the whole nine yards.

Fixing velocity, spread, and giving a better direct-fire mode all are fixes to the weapon. You can't fix stupid players or bad play. Don't take one for the other.

[Egg Fu]

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.

[Nik Reaper]

Well, let's face it, LRMs need a rework , that will fail at first and might work out in version 3~4 and will likely be happening after the engine upgrade ... so yeah... complain if you must , it probly is correct to a degree and has been said/complained about before.

Edited by Nik Reaper, 26 June 2016 - 11:12 AM.

[Egg Fu]

If you're in a LRM mech that can't equip it's own tag and/or narc, play a different LRM boat.

[wanderer]

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

If you're in a LRM mech that can't equip it's own tag and/or narc, play a different LRM boat.

Because clearly, the weapon that needs you to equip an extra ton per launcher (Artemis), it's own module (target decay), and eats ammo like mad should require you to mount what's supposed to be bonuses just to be average.

Clearly. Let's just say all of your lasers take an extra hardpoint + a few more tons just to be average. No? That's too bad.

[Egg Fu]

wanderer, on 26 June 2016 - 12:33 PM, said:

Because clearly, the weapon that needs you to equip an extra ton per launcher (Artemis), it's own module (target decay), and eats ammo like mad should require you to mount what's supposed to be bonuses just to be average.

Clearly. Let's just say all of your lasers take an extra hardpoint + a few more tons just to be average. No? That's too bad.

As per your last sentence - No, that's too bad for you!

Stop hiding, lock your own targets and apply tag, and share some armor with the rest of the team.

[totgeboren]

A funny thing I noticed is when you have the range module for LRMs and fire a big lump of em at 1.1k, the time it takes for them to reach the enemy is so long that they often have time both to hide, then wait and think the coast is clear, then break cover only to get the big slow salvo in the face!
Gotta find the silver lining you know.

To be honest, I don't think LRMs need a massive boost. Speed raised to 200 m/s and the same spread as the LRM10 on all launchers is probably enough as you suggested.
I consistently do well in both my AWS-8V (3xLRM15) and CPLT-C4 (4xLRM10) at least, but that is likely due to the hard-working TAG (anyone who complains about LRMs while not using TAG/NARC should simply LTP).

Edited by totgeboren, 26 June 2016 - 12:58 PM.

[Trauglodyte]

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.

The question remains: Is there a middle ground to making LRMs better while reducing the impact of LRM50+ boaters?

[Mazzyplz]

cazidin, on 26 June 2016 - 09:41 AM, said:

Be thankful that PPCs are half-way decent again.

they ARE!?!?!

[Burke IV]

The new map changes feel a bit nerfish towards LRMs to me.

[Egg Fu]

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

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.

Good friend of mine has been playing this game since release and he's still humping the doorknob as you say. Pretty much all he has ever played are LRM boats. He never really learned how to play the game because he just hides behind the group.

[Darth Hotz]

During the introduction of the oceanic server there was an event that needed you to jojn this server. Being european I had a ping of 500 and btw. I was drunk too.

After missing every shot with direct fire weapons I jumped in my lurm hunchie and started to score massive damage in nearly every game. So, does a weapon system you score high with, while barely being able to move the mouse straight and a having ping of 500, needs to be improved? Hell, no!

[wanderer]

Egg Fu, on 26 June 2016 - 12:38 PM, said:

As per your last sentence - No, that's too bad for you!

Stop hiding, lock your own targets and apply tag, and share some armor with the rest of the team.

That -is- being up front, taking my hits, and sharing armor.

Have you actually been reading all this, or are you just missing every fourth word?

Right now, to be average, you have to:

1) Mount Artemis. +1 ton per launcher, and guess what? It's direct fire only. Artemis doesn't work in indirect fire mode. Indirect mode automatically means you have worst possible spread.
2) Wait for lock. If I get my own, I'm sitting out there until lock-on happens. If I use TAG, I've burned one of the few hardpoints I have for anything BUT missiles (for example, an Orion-VA has all of TWO energy hardpoints). If I use NARC, I've just burned another 5+ tons in launcher and ammo and it doesn't reach past 450m (600 for Clan). Either one will speed up a lock, NARC will prevent it from being broken if I lose LOS.
3) Fire and hope my missiles get there before the target finds cover. Neither TAG nor NARC improves velocity, so I still have to wait for them to arrive. Slowly.
4) Watch them spread on impact anyway. Because LRMs.
5) Get an "average" hit that if it's larger than an LRM 10 will miss with some damage, EVEN WITH TAG AND/OR NARC, because none of them actually improves spread, just tracking speed.

http://mwo.gamepedia.com/NARC_Beacon
http://mwo.gamepedia...ition_Gear_(TAG)

Tracking strength is how well missiles follow a moving target- that is, the more it's moving, the more likely even more missiles will be off-target and hit dirt. It has nothing to do with how tightly your missiles cluster to begin with, nor does it reduce time-to-target.

You:

1) Put target in crosshairs, pull trigger.
2)Damage begins in a fraction of a second. If ballistic weapons or PPCs, you can even duck down behind cover as soon as you fire. You can even get the full potential damage of your weapon without a single added bit of help.

[wanderer]

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

The question remains: Is there a middle ground to making LRMs better while reducing the impact of LRM50+ boaters?

At this point, it's literally more and better focused damage to mount a bunch of LRM 5s without Artemis than 45-60 in LRM 15/20s with Artemis. If the guy mounting 5x5 or 6x5 isn't breaking the game and he's better than the guy mounting 3-4 x15 or even x20 at a huge investment in tonnage, why are the mega-lurmer types even a potential problem? You're not getting double the effective damage out of an LRM 10 vs. an LRM 5, and you're lucky to get double the effective damage out of an LRM 15 vs. a 5 because half of those extra missiles will hit arms and legs, while the rest will hit dirt. And you're even worse firing an LRM 20.

The big tube launcher types just look more impressive because there's more missiles incoming and they splat more damage across more locations. They even put out less DPS because they're also slower launchers.

[Navid A1]

Darth Hotz, on 26 June 2016 - 01:27 PM, said:

During the introduction of the oceanic server there was an event that needed you to jojn this server. Being european I had a ping of 500 and btw. I was drunk too.

After missing every shot with direct fire weapons I jumped in my lurm hunchie and started to score massive damage in nearly every game. So, does a weapon system you score high with, while barely being able to move the mouse straight and a having ping of 500, needs to be improved? Hell, no!

Let me give you some clarifications... it seems like you are very far away from the reality of things.

Hunchback-4J at that time had -67% cooldown on LRM10.. That is basically more than 3 times faster cooldown.

What you had on your hunchi was 2xLRM30 with tonnage cost of 2 LRM10s and spread of an LRM10 on a fast medium mech that can not pack an LRM60 in normal circumstances.

If missile related quirks are removed, we can perfectly give all racks the same spread as LRM5 or 10 and increase their speed or give the missiles acceleration.


Please people, talk with reason.... do not draw conclusion based on biased observations that do not apply anymore.
PGI does that... and that is why their understanding of LRMs are dated back to 2012.

[IdolElite]

I mentioned this elsewhere but I'll say it again, LRMs need a toggle for launch angle, one angle that shoots them up like present, and one that shoots them out like SRMs. Obviously, the mechanics already exist in game. I feel like that would encourage a lot more line of sight lrming. Other than that, a velocity increase would be nice, and I'm on board for a bit of balancing between the various lrm launchers.

[Darth Hotz]

Navid A1, on 26 June 2016 - 01:43 PM, said:

Let me give you some clarifications... it seems like you are very far away from the reality of things.

Hunchback-4J at that time had -67% cooldown on LRM10.. That is basically more than 3 times faster cooldown.

What you had on your hunchi was 2xLRM30 with tonnage cost of 2 LRM10s and spread of an LRM10 on a fast medium mech that can not pack an LRM60 in normal circumstances.

If missile related quirks are removed, we can perfectly give all racks the same spread as LRM5 or 10 and increase their speed or give the missiles acceleration.


Please people, talk with reason.... do not draw conclusion based on biased observations that do not apply anymore.
PGI does that... and that is why their understanding of LRMs are dated back to 2012.

Just recently I built a Lurmmauler for shits and giggles and guess what, I scored extremely high again. So I think I have reason enough to say no to any lrm improvements, because I know how to play lrms. The game is to static already with lots of missle boats hiding far away from the front line and let others do their work. It is completly reasonable that you get downsides for using a weapon system that does not require you to face the enemy. And if you are one of those lrm players that pump volley after volley into rocks and buildings noone can help you anyway.