7 replies to this topic

[Livaria]

The issue I find with LRM's is not because they aren't powerful (Because they are). More-so that they aren't reliable. Now, we don't necessarily need to increase LRM velocity but perhaps target decay.

If we increase the default target decay for all players then LRMs will have more time to track their target.
LRMs usually take some time to reach their target anyways. So in most cases players can find cover or defend themselves in some way.

Another thing that could be done is to alter radar deprivation to reduce target decay instead of removing mechs from sensors altogether. Agree or disagree, I just want this kind of thing tested.

Edited by Livaria, 14 September 2016 - 12:44 AM.

[Sader325]

LRMs without advanced target decay are useless.

Solution: Buy advanced target decay.

I put it on every single LRM mech I own.

/thread.

[Kaptain]

Sader325, on 14 September 2016 - 01:51 AM, said:

LRMs without advanced target decay are useless.

Solution: Buy advanced target decay.

I put it on every single LRM mech I own.

/thread.

Is it not hard countered by target deprivation?

[Livaria]

Should target decay really be worth 3 million and some GXP just to make LRM's more reliable? What about the players that are spotting for an LRM boat but don't have advanced target decay only because they either don't want it or it's too expensive?

If this continues, to be the case, then I see a big problem in solo queue.

Edited by Livaria, 14 September 2016 - 11:45 AM.

[Deathlike]

To be fair, it wouldn't change the fact that LRMs are a bad overall weapon system, due to inherent design.


Cover would still make LRMs weep, no matter how much that target lock you have.

[Livaria]

Yeah, cover will do that, but it will do it less, because of increased target decay. That's the entire purpose of this topic. It may not completely solve every issue. But it's a solution.

I also disagree, I don't think the system is all that bad. It could be improved that's for sure. But LRMs do perform their intended job. If the system is so bad; then what's so wrong with it?

Here is what I would change about the system. A warning indicator that will tell you that the LRM trajectory is headed towards obstructing terrain. Or even just the ability to manipulate the trajectory height. A toggle perhaps, between a direct-fire and indirect fire.

If someone brings up an issue like this. Then I want some effort towards problem solving. Not just people around just to say It's a bad system.

Edited by Livaria, 29 September 2016 - 02:53 PM.

[Gen82]

Firstly, this is the energy draw forum.
Secondly, LRMS are low skill, low risk (albeit heavy) weapons. They should not also be highly effective all the time.

The whole LRM thing might need a rework, but I don't think it should be a developer priority.

[Livaria]

I'm using the energy draw topic as an opportunity to be heard. This topic seems to be one of the best options in a long time after spending lots of time in the feature suggestions section.

Now, these changes don't have to occour during PTS. It's just that I don't see any reason not to bring it up. I would at least like to see more consideration when it comes to LRM's. Maybe not now, but perhaps in the future. It would be nice if testing could happen, but I understand if and why it doesn't happen in this PTS.

Don't tell me that this forum is only specific to energy draw, it's clear that we're changing more than energy draw. There's UAC jam, there's LRM Cooldown changes, How about the changes to the skill tree as well? That's not energy draw is it?

And lastly, this suggestion doesn't make LRM's effective all the time. We've already discussed how cover can still interfere with LRMs.

Edited by Livaria, 29 September 2016 - 06:23 PM.