135 replies to this topic

[Battlemaster56]

Well we need to gonna remove the laziness of indirect fire, by making the spread go over 95% over the target so if you want more cluster and concentrated damage you better have LoS or someone narc'd.

The real problem is indirect fire, it make people lazy and over reliant of such things, I had a match not to long ago wear a boars head built for brawling was standing back just to get a couple of locks for his single lrm 10, and when he was still in brawling range he still actively search for locks when he could easily get 4 easy kills that me and a brawler founder atlas only crippled from are sneaky push in river. You need to have a serve punishment for firing inderiect with lrms something that will lower your damage output, or outright make it useless.

Edited by Battlemaster56, 25 February 2017 - 02:01 AM.

[The Lobsters]

Indirect fire is already very weak and easy to avoid.

Los fire with tag and artemis is brutal. Artemis requires los to receive it's tracking and spread bonus. It only helps indirect fire with decreasing lock time.

The buffs/nerfs to lrm's already exist ingame. I don't understand why they need any adjustment.

As someone who only uses lrm's with tag and artemis, if you buff los fire, that will only mean later on calls for blanket nerfs.

[JediPanther]

As a heavy catapult lrm user the lrms need all the buffs they can get. The thing they need the most is VELOCITY increase to make the 15s and 20s worth taking or make lrm 15s and 20s have buffed cool down time stack-able with my mech's quirks.

Tie the lrm cool down, range and velocity to specific mech variants based on their stock load out while making it effective for only that lrm type so you can not go to a bigger or smaller lrm launcher and still have the quirk's effects applied.

Example: Catapult C1 lrm 15 velocity +15% Lrm 15 cool down +10%
Catapult C4 lrm 20 cool down +25% lrm 20 velocity +15% lrm 20 range +10%
Catapult A1 lrm 10 cool down +15%


As a light pilot I'd need a lot more reason to "scout" or "tag/narc locks" other than some lrm user begging at the match start. The only lrm user I'll ever scout for is the A1 Cat as that mech has no energy point for tag. I'd expect a BIG reward for tag/narcs for giving up weapons,heat sinks, etc on my light mech. Light mech Que hovers near 6% at best for a host of reasons far beyond the lack of rewards (which is none) for scouting.

Edit: To help lights actually scout give them scout specific equipment buffs. The raven 3l already has a nice narc buff. Make the Tag laser not be visible under standard vision mode. Make it visible under thermal and night vision. I'm not going to stand with a light mech waving around a -here-i-am sign.

Some thing like tag lock on time reduced by 10-15% would be a good buff. Give a mech like the commando the ability to launch two uavs.

Edited by JediPanther, 25 February 2017 - 04:09 PM.

[Khobai]

LRMs need to be weaker at indirect fire. You should not be able to indirect fire unless the target is TAGGED or NARCED. That helps encourage lights to use those support systems more often.

However in exchange LRMs should be better at direct fire. They need to gradually accelerate upto a higher top speed. And artemis should give missiles a crit bonus similar to how the targeting computer gives lasers/ballistics a crit bonus.

Also ECM should not prevent missile locks, it should only double lock-on time. ECM hard countering LRMs has always been a terrible game mechanic.

Lastly the missile warning should be removed. You dont get warned when any other weapon is about to hit you, why should you get warned about LRMs? The exception being AMS, you should still get a missile warning if you have AMS installed. That would help encourage players to use AMS more.

Those changes would help make direct LRMs much better without making indirect LRMs too good.


Also its about time we got some different LRM launchers like thunder LRMs and swarm LRMs. Sadly switching ammo types isnt possible but they should still be introduced as new weapons.

Quote

Indirect fire is already very weak and easy to avoid.

exactly LRMs need to be buffed because theyre too weak. although if you buff lrms, indirect fire would then have to be weakened to prevent it from becoming too strong.

which is exactly what my above changes fix while also making tag, narc, and ams more viable.

Edited by Khobai, 25 February 2017 - 07:57 PM.

[MischiefSC]

Have indirect require tag or NARC.

Have direct fire travel at AC20 speed and tighter grouping.

That would be a good start.

[LordNothing]

living legends type system is preferable. but generally speaking i think the new weapons solve a lot of these problems. clans get streak lrms, is get mrms. these will likely be preferred for direct fire and should be better than lrms used in the same role. og lrms should stay king of indirect fire, unless we get arrow iv.

[Andi Nagasia]

LordNothing, on 26 February 2017 - 08:44 AM, said:

living legends type system is preferable. but generally speaking i think the new weapons solve a lot of these problems. clans get streak lrms, is get mrms. these will likely be preferred for direct fire and should be better than lrms used in the same role. og lrms should stay king of indirect fire, unless we get arrow iv.

well Clan Streak-LRMs have no indirect fire, and weight as much as IS LRMs,
so its likely they will be Volley fire like IS LRMs and have greater Speed(as they have no Indirect fire)

IS MRMs dont have Guidance, they are Dumb Fire,
as such would likely work like SRMs but Stream Fire like C-LRMs for balance,

[1Grimbane]

i have racked up plebty of dmg dumb-firing them at snipers. no lock on warning no chance. keep them as indirect since that role and use is very very limited to a few players mainly. what i mean by that is it is a negligible use that has no REAL advantage. no one benefits from indirect fire. an no one is locked out of doing it that way as any player with lrms can do this. only crazy people like to limit themselves or put something behind a component like tag or bap only use.

Edited by 1Grimbane, 26 February 2017 - 03:05 PM.

[Lucky Noob]

lets make this simple....

How many LRMs where used in the World Championship ?

Okay now that we have that Point lets better think about something to make em Compareable to the Weapons that where used.

[Andi Nagasia]

Lucky Noob, on 26 February 2017 - 03:12 PM, said:

lets make this simple....

How many LRMs where used in the World Championship ?

Okay now that we have that Point lets better think about something to make em Compareable to the Weapons that where used.

the problem is how to make LRMs useful in all levels of play with out making them OP or Exploitable?

[Weeny Machine]

Lucky Noob, on 26 February 2017 - 03:12 PM, said:

lets make this simple....

How many LRMs where used in the World Championship ?

Okay now that we have that Point lets better think about something to make em Compareable to the Weapons that where used.

You are talking about a controlled environment. Now take Quick Play where you get randomly assigned 11 other people. Okay, now that we have that point...

As I said before: remove the easy lock access and make it only available with TAG or NARC and then buff it (maybe even make the weapon fire and forget)
This will prevent 2-3 missile boats forcing a dumb peek-a-boo game which already is rampant anway

Then also buff the direct fire capability.

[Lucky Noob]

Bush Hopper, on 26 February 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

You are talking about a controlled environment. Now take Quick Play where you get randomly assigned 11 other people. Okay, now that we have that point...

As I said before: remove the easy lock access and make it only available with TAG or NARC and then buff it (maybe even make the weapon fire and forget)
This will prevent 2-3 missile boats forcing a dumb peek-a-boo game which already is rampant anway

Then also buff the direct fire capability.

so you say, any Missler now shoud rely on Random teammates to

a) Invest 5 Tons for Narc, or
b ) using an Item who says to all Enemies, hello follow the red Line for Kill ?

Even now its hard to hold your Lock over the entry Time of the Missle Flight, not to mention Radar Derp and expirienced Players who are realy good in avoiding Missles.

Edited by Lucky Noob, 26 February 2017 - 05:21 PM.

[The Amazing Atomic Spaniel]

Bush Hopper, on 25 February 2017 - 01:18 AM, said:

A weapon system with

a. easy accessible auto-lock
b. supresses movement to a degree where 2-3 missiles boats simply forces mindless peek-a-boo gameplay

is simply mind boggling in a shooter.

Hmmm... not sure. I see peek-a-boo play in matches where there are no LRMs at all. People hide and poke because Gauss and ERPPC will take them apart in seconds out in the open. LRMs are so slow they don't really hinder movement at all unless the firing mech is very close.

[Burning2nd]

Andi Nagasia, on 18 February 2017 - 09:01 PM, said:

and giving lights more use,

you have just been marked for death

[Galenit]

Bush Hopper, on 26 February 2017 - 03:26 PM, said:

You are talking about a controlled environment. Now take Quick Play where you get randomly assigned 11 other people. Okay, now that we have that point...

As I said before: remove the easy lock access and make it only available with TAG or NARC and then buff it (maybe even make the weapon fire and forget)
This will prevent 2-3 missile boats forcing a dumb peek-a-boo game which already is rampant anway

Then also buff the direct fire capability.

In an controlled inviroment, needing a second mech using a 4+ ton weapon to use lrms to their full potential is possible,
in pug its just gamble and without real rewards for them its rare,
maybe just say "remove indirect" and dont hide the intention.

No peek-a-boo because of all the gauss, ppc high alpha meta?
Why is there peek-a-boo when there are no lrms in match then?

Lets say lrms need tag or narc for indirect,
but then let narc and emc do what it does in tt.
Deal?

Burnin2nd, on 27 February 2017 - 01:30 AM, said:

you have just been marked for death

All tracking missiles (lrm, ssrm and slrm) from your team in range will track and hit the narc-beacon without lock. With real narc there will be also no counter because real ecm.

Hope they will indroduce umu´s in the same patch, i dont want to drow in tears ...

Edited by Galenit, 27 February 2017 - 02:47 AM.

[Weeny Machine]

Galenit, on 27 February 2017 - 02:37 AM, said:

In an controlled inviroment, needing a second mech using a 4+ ton weapon to use lrms to their full potential is possible,
in pug its just gamble and without real rewards for them its rare,
maybe just say "remove indirect" and dont hide the intention.

Read again what I wrote.

1. I said that direct fire needs to be buffed as compensation.
2. The more effort needing to be put into IF should be rewarded in making it (just a suggestion) reall fire & forget. And is it sooo problematic for an LRM boat to carry either a TAG or NARC if it is so keen on IF? It also prevents mindless IF switching and shutting down movement

So please read closely what someone wrote before you accuse him on anything and stuff your semi-hidden ad hominem

[a gaijin]

A lot of good arguments here but if I have to mention one, Konniving's points stand out as accurate and concise.

I'd rather have MWO be more of a sim than a "stompy arcade shooter" so I favor anything that makes it more sim-like. That said, real world missile systems use friendly telemetry info for indirect fire so they should in MWO as well.

But I also like good ol' BattleTech lore so to support that Clan LRMs should not get indirect targeting and telemetry data, which means they would only be usable if fired from LoS for Clanners.
IS LRMs should always get enemy targeting and telemetry info from friendly spotters.

I only know lore from the novels (never played TT) and iirc some Clans (Wolf comes to mind) started using IS tactics but I can't recall the year that started. My point is, it's 3052 now and the Clans still mostly should be fighting the Clan way (which is hard for PGI to implement in-game for reasons unknown), and Clan LRM systems shouldn't be able to gain targeting info from friendly radar at this year in BT/MWO time.
Now if the Clans had changed their tactics by 3060 (I honestly can't recall) then LRM indirect fire for Clans doesn't need any changing. That's supposed to be this summer, right?


Anyhow, I just want PGI to make MWO both more realistic and sim-like, and more BattleTech, not less.

That's my 2 C-Bills.

[JC Daxion]

I've said this many times.. so i might as well say it again..


Step 1, Remove blind fire, UNLESS your target is TAGGED, NARC'd, UAV.

Step 2, Add LOS buff, that increases lockspeed, and lowers flight arc. this would make grabbing your lock and faster fire, and increase travel speed (as lower arc means they would get there quicker)

You must maintain lock by keeping LOS

Step 3, Remove the Tag laser from view.. aka make it infer-red. BUT make it known that you are under tag. You would still have the option to look to see where it was, but not make it so easy to find.



this would keep the blindfire aspects of the weapon system, and keep it a bit more unique. It would also give LRM mechs a reason to be a little more aggressive.

It would reduce the way LRM's are totally OP when it comes to lower tiers, and Help make them better at higher..

[Koniving]

Spoiler

Koniving, on 19 February 2017 - 01:31 AM, said:

I voted no. However...
There was no option to take the lore friendly route of IS goes indirect, Clan goes direct.

Allow me to elaborate:

It is very noteworthy that through infantry spotters, vehicle support, and the assistance of scout 'Mechs, that the Inner Sphere made very frequent use of indirect fire for LRMs. In fact, the 1980s lore specifically states that (IS) LRMs were always fired at a ballistic launch angle (hence the 180m minimum accurate range, if the missiles are already going at an upward incline straight from the launcher they would have a hard time yawing downward at a target that is closer than that range; this is also why the 1980s MLRS system (from stats of which the Catapult was conceived and the very method of 30 meter hexes was even contrived for the original Battle Droids board game before it became BattleTech) has a minimum accurate range (of 180 miles).



On the other hand, according to that same source material, the Clans lacked that 180m minimum accurate range (by minimum accurate range, I mean both the IS and the Clans could do full damage if they hit a target at less than 180 meters!!! Just it was pretty dang hard for the IS to do as there was a penalty to your potential accuracy or chance to hit). But this came at an obvious cost, Clan mentality shunned on and forbade the use of LRMs for indirect fire.

---------

I am aware that through a completely new company that owned Battletech in the late 90s that this lore was changed to a minimum arming range to allow for the hot loaded trait... This also came with the caveat that hot loaded LRMs could explode in the launcher when crit... and that Clan LRMs were always hot loaded and at risk of exploding when crit. I imagine players would favor this less than the lore I'd rather push for.
---
In other words, we can try removing indirect fire as well as removing the minimum range damages reductions.

For the IS, they keep their indirect fire, get permitted to deliver damage at less than 180 meters but at less than 180 meters, the missiles will be hard pressed to go after the intended target and many will likely overshoot the target as the missiles go high into the air. Maybe even like this, minus the spread.

Spoiler

For the Clans, they get that "exponential damage reduction" removed so they do full damage, the 'arc' removed so that the LRMs will fly reasonably low (but not too low, so they won't outright replace SRMs or be outright superior to IS MRMs) and have indirect fire removed completely without the use of TAG or NARC. Under no circumstances should the Clans have an identical high-arc downward-impact to the IS.
(The Clans are not supposed to hide and thus IS tech should be able to flush them out so that they do not hide... meanwhile the IS is known for using 'cowardly' tactics such as ambushes, pop-and-squat cover and so on for fighting, and so Clan tech should have ways of reducing it but not outright stopping it. After all, Clans have the long range advantage for most weapons and the IS need ways to semi-safely get in close, while the Clans need to find ways to deal with this 'unusual' problem.)

For both sides: Increase missile velocity to 1.5x that of SRMs at minimum, but reduce missile course corrective agility (meaning that LRMs will have a harder time making unplanned turns so that the missiles -- as fast as they are depicted in the thing above -- could still be dodged even if using cover would be nearly worthless. This combined with the IS having indirect fire will allow LRMs to help flush out 'stale mates' for the IS side so that Clanners hiding at long range will have to move out of good spots. For the Clans who will likely be using LRMs much closer, this means that LRMs will not be able to replace Streak missiles as a longer range faster firing higher overall damage alternative. Leave good to decent course correction on Artemis to increase its importance and value as it adds a ton regardless of which side you're on.

*Possibly reduce indirect targeting/locks to NARC or TAG-acquired enemy signatures.


--------------

Key notes:
The MRM is an Inner Sphere tech. With the provisions given above, the MRM has a perfect place between direct fire SRMs and up-and-over indirect fire LRMs.
The Clans, whom do NOT get MRMs, have direct fire LRMs that can behave similarly to MRMs.

Provides further balancing for missile weight differences.
Preserves and enhances the unique flavor of each side.
Increases the value of the scouting/spotting role.
Increases the value of Artemis without destroying the value of LRMs without Artemis.
Ensures MRMs have a tangible role in the game.

---
A final note: I predict the argument that the Clanners may use their LRMs like guided SRMs...

Funny thing about that, SRMs, they have limited guidance and therefore are NOT unguided missiles. That's Dead Fire SRMs and LRMs, a type of ammo. So yes, MRMs do have a place, and Clan LRMs will not be replacing Clan SRMs.


Mkay. I made my case.

Is it strange that most of the likes I got for that post, calling for indirect fire for IS and removing it for Clan...( Well it goes into why and some additional info and stipulations...) are coming from people currently (at the time of each like) affiliated with the Clans?

I will be honest I didn't expect it.

[ZippySpeedMonkey]

Or, better yet make LRM ( and SRM ) launchers start to jam if you decide to boat more than 2...

I have this sad feeling that your post is the result of being on the wrong end of some serious LRM fire...

Edited by ZippySpeedMonkey, 28 February 2017 - 08:35 PM.