25 replies to this topic

[Brenden]

I mean, I know that modern day missiles have an minimum arming distance, but theirs is like two or three feet away. So, why does the Inner Sphere LRMs have an arming distance when say, the Clans don't?

[WolvesX]

PGI:

[Andi Nagasia]

Brenden, on 26 February 2017 - 10:40 AM, said:

I mean, I know that modern day missiles have an minimum arming distance, but theirs is like two or three feet away. So, why does the Inner Sphere LRMs have an arming distance when say, the Clans don't?

Lore, not much more, also Clan do have a Min Distance,
everything under 150m does about half damage,
everything under 120m does 1/10th damage,
(Clan arnt supposed to in Lore, but Balance)

[Dee Eight]

ACTUALLY both are supposed to have a the same minimum in lore. But its not a 'arming' minimum. Its a guidance minimum. Clan LRM launchers are supposed to be identical in all respects to inner sphere launchers except they're more compact and weigh half as much. The weapons are designed for long range fire, thus they do not track very well below 180 meters. In battletech you took a penalty to your to-hit roll, in MWO its zero or less damage as PGI gave us a screwed up implementations from the lore. They could have simply made it a much larger spread size until the missiles have passed 180 meters. As to the clan LRM damages...it has an inverse slope like direct fire weapons do from optimal to maximum range except it slopes upwards from 0 damage at 0 meters to full damage at 180 meters. So at 10 meters... that's 1/18th of full damage. A C-LRM80 volley would be 4.44 damage at that distance.

Edited by Dee Eight, 26 February 2017 - 11:40 AM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Brenden, on 26 February 2017 - 10:40 AM, said:

I mean, I know that modern day missiles have an minimum arming distance, but theirs is like two or three feet away. So, why does the Inner Sphere LRMs have an arming distance when say, the Clans don't?

TT gaming balance mechanism. In orignal TT Battletech, with Level 1 Tech, 2x LRM20 would be absolutely brutal in CQB, especialyl with the very questionable S/M/L range system designed for the game (which never made sense... my speed of light small laser is HARDER to hit something at 90 meters with that literally ANY projectile weapon in the game (sans MG), with all the variables of travel time, gravity, etc? Seriously... I love the game, but like many games in 70s and 80s, in particular, it's clear that what little gun knowledge Jordan had came from watching TV, which was even less accurate back then, than now).

Honestly... LRMs minimum range is one of a dozen SMH rules things in TT, from an IRL perspective.

Edited by Bishop Steiner, 26 February 2017 - 11:55 AM.

[FupDup]

I would have preferred for missile minimum ranges to be emulated by really bad tracking in close range rather than low damage or no damage.

[Andi Nagasia]

@Dee Eight,
C-LRMs dont have a Min Range in TT,

[Vonbach]

Why do they have a minimum range? To keep me from putting dual LRM 20s on an archer and plastering people at 90 meters.
Or worse doing this in a stalker.

[El Bandito]

LRM minimum range should be reduced to 100 meters for IS and 150 meters for Clans. As is, it is too situational.

[tworivers]

Okay before we nerf more things a couple of observations. Many players carry only LRM's then complain when they get attacked close range and no defense , well that is not the games fault and if you only carry LRM then you will suffer close range and this is not new but guys see the 40 dmg per shot and go "wow I can rackup the dmg" . Get used to the way the game is , many of us are and develop tactics that account for arming distance rather than whining about it here and try to change the game because a few are not smart enough to mix weapon groups or play like a team who will cover the lrm boats. So tired of having guys want it all rather than learning and changing their game style to be successful. Took me a long while but I am improving not because I want everything that kills me nerfed but understand the game , the lore and make your game style fit to the game not try and make the game fit your gamestyle.

[jjm1]

Brawling with LRMs is already tier 5's meta.

[BlueFlames]

jjm1, on 27 February 2017 - 09:08 AM, said:

Brawling with LRMs is already tier 5's meta.

With the seeding bonus built into the PSR system, that's wormed its way into tier two already.

[R Valentine]

tworivers, on 27 February 2017 - 08:42 AM, said:

Okay before we nerf more things a couple of observations. Many players carry only LRM's then complain when they get attacked close range and no defense , well that is not the games fault and if you only carry LRM then you will suffer close range and this is not new but guys see the 40 dmg per shot and go "wow I can rackup the dmg" . Get used to the way the game is , many of us are and develop tactics that account for arming distance rather than whining about it here and try to change the game because a few are not smart enough to mix weapon groups or play like a team who will cover the lrm boats. So tired of having guys want it all rather than learning and changing their game style to be successful. Took me a long while but I am improving not because I want everything that kills me nerfed but understand the game , the lore and make your game style fit to the game not try and make the game fit your gamestyle.

Uhm, clan mechs can already fire LRMs at close range with no arming disability. You aren't even discussing the topic at hand.

[tworivers]

Kiran Yagami, on 27 February 2017 - 09:36 AM, said:

Uhm, clan mechs can already fire LRMs at close range with no arming disability. You aren't even discussing the topic at hand.

It is if you have a good comprehension of english and understand the game which if you did you would get what I am talking about.

[Metus regem]

Brenden, on 26 February 2017 - 10:40 AM, said:

I mean, I know that modern day missiles have an minimum arming distance, but theirs is like two or three feet away. So, why does the Inner Sphere LRMs have an arming distance when say, the Clans don't?

TT rules...

IS LRM's could still damage mechs inside of 7 hexes, it was just harder to hit with in those hexes.... Your target number went up by 1, for every hex under that "minimum range"... How ever PGI has been all over the place with minimum ranges in MWO...

PPC's and IS LRM's both get 0 damage

AC2's&5's ignore it

Gauss Rifles get a charge up mechanic....


I'd just like some consistency with it, either 0 damage, scaling damage or just ignored all together...

[Nesutizale]

Yup harder to hit is the entire point with LRMs instead of no damage.
LRMs are supposed to fly high up so a mech would have to lower his upper torso to hit a target close to him. Makeing it harder to aim. Arming the warhead isn't the problem.
Point is that in MWO we can't lower our upper torso so they had to come up with something else and they went with "no damage".
There could have been other solutions like someone here mentioned about increasing the spread the closer the enemy gets or have a curve that would send missiles higher or other things.

Still I think thats kinda okay as it is. It makes it a more tactical weapon instead of "the other SRM"

[Jables McBarty]

BlueFlames, on 27 February 2017 - 09:24 AM, said:

With the seeding bonus built into the PSR system, that's wormed its way into tier two already.

Could just be MM magic. Had a guy in my game on Saturday who claimed to be T5.

[1Grimbane]

as a former marine that one saw a boot accidently discharge a 40mm training grenade from his 203 right into his pouch full of other marker rounds on the ground from 2 ft away... i can say i support arming distance

Edited by 1Grimbane, 27 February 2017 - 11:46 AM.

[MechaBattler]

Enhanced LRMs someday?

[The Lobsters]

The 180m min arming distance is actually a safety feature. It prevents you from damaging your team mates.

This also implies that the Lrm mech should be within 180m of the frontline mechs. Jus' sayin'