145 replies to this topic

[Andi Nagasia]

Bishop Steiner, on 23 March 2017 - 06:25 PM, said:

Decaf. I want you to switch to decaf my friend.

i i ill try bishop i ill try,

Bishop Steiner, on 23 March 2017 - 06:32 PM, said:

But in seriousness? I think you need to take a deep breath and wait for the Skill Tree. I found LRMs to be much improved (though not meta perfect by any means) through smart Skill Node selection.

Thus, I would prefer to wait until that is done before hacking away at them wholesale in some manner that may not work well with the Skill Tree.

i agree, the Skill Tree does help LRMs, but i still think they need a velocity Boost,

how much velocity Boost do you think 100m-160m Range is worth?

[ZippySpeedMonkey]

They're fine the way the are...

The main issue with them is when they're stacked.

My solution would be to have them and any ammo based weapon start to jam when you go above 2 in a mech. The would cut down on the LRM spam real quick...

Edited by ZippySpeedMonkey, 23 March 2017 - 06:53 PM.

[Bishop Steiner]

Andi Nagasia, on 23 March 2017 - 06:42 PM, said:

i i ill try bishop i ill try,


i agree, the Skill Tree does help LRMs, but i still think they need a velocity Boost,

how much velocity Boost do you think 100m-160m Range is worth?

I got a nice vel boost and had more range in the skill tree.

[Wildstreak]

Andi Nagasia, on 23 March 2017 - 12:32 PM, said:

Right now MWO LRMs have a 1000m Range,
in TT 30m is 1Hex so MWO LRMs would have a 33Hex Range,
however in TT LRMs have 21Hex Range 12Hexs Less,

now most if not all weapons in MWO have 30m/Hex range
so should LRMs be brought inline with all other weapons in MWO,
(to keep LRMs Ranged Viability lets assume 40m/Hex)


=the Concept=
LRMs would have 840m(40m/Hex) Range,

Actually, weapons in TT have an Extreme Range.
LRMs Extreme Range is 28 hexes.
28 x 30 meters per hex = 840 meters.
No hex fudging needed.
Just check the tables.
I have long pushed for a max 840 range on LRMs to change things up.

[Threat Doc]

ZippySpeedMonkey, on 23 March 2017 - 06:53 PM, said:

My solution would be to have them and any ammo based weapon start to jam when you go above 2 in a mech. The would cut down on the LRM spam real quick...

Gun monkey opinion. Sorry, Zippy, but LRMs are NOT a serious weapon in this game, especially for the amount of ammo we're required to carry to get between one-half and the same damage value as most of you. If I run 1,620 LRMs in my 'Mech, I maneuver to get the best shots I can, be patient and assist those who lock up opposing 'Mechs to kill them, and I still only get 550 - 840 points damage, there's something wrong with it. I've been running LRMs since July 2012, in closed beta, and though I'm still picking up my abilities again since coming back from a 15-month break from this game, I should still have been able to improve to between 650 - 1,200 points damage per match, by now. That's how I know LRMs have been, yet again, nerf'd.

I want them to be a serious weapon in the game, again, respected and lamented by our enemies.

[Gattsus]

I like the idea of trading travel distance. This would help newbies to stay with their team and seasoned warriors would take advantage of the bump in speed. Who lurms at max range anyway... But I digress. Having said this, please don't bump the speed to lurmaggedon levels. It was pretty unpleasant the last times it happened.

[Gattsus]

I hope that you don't mind me suggesting to ha e pills like these integrated IN THE LAUNCHER/GAME, so everyone could vote.

Unlike now that only forumwarriors take part in them.

[dario03]

Lyoto Machida, on 23 March 2017 - 06:06 PM, said:

It was glorious actually...it's just that the game was filled with a bunch of direct fire crybabies.

Glorious? It was basically the only weapon on the field. Glorious would be balance so we have weapon diversity.

[Threat Doc]

I like that idea... put a daily poll up, 24-36 hours, in the launcher, rather than on the forums, and a link to the forum posting. This would allow people who normally don't come to the forums to vote and, further, those who want to voice their opinion as well as voting, will have that opportunity.

Second, I suppose buffing LRMs to the level I would like to see them at, which would make them viable, again, would work well if no one could customize their 'Mechs, but as everyone can change all the time, then yes, perhaps buffing the speed and cutting some range -to 840m, not 630m as was suggested earlier in this thread- would actually help the game all around. Something else I wouldn't mind seeing is, perhaps, buffing the amount of LRMs per ton so close-in LRM 'Mechs can add more lasers by taking off some tons from ammo.

[Lyoto Machida]

dario03, on 24 March 2017 - 03:16 AM, said:

Glorious? It was basically the only weapon on the field. Glorious would be balance so we have weapon diversity.

Maybe people like to try out weapons that have been recently changed or something.

Pretty funny they can handle direct fire and laser spam but couldn't handle 175m/s LRM fire though...

[Almond Brown]

Another "just can't vote". You were doing so well with the OP right until...

Quote

this also will have the secondary effect of forcing LRM Only Boats Closer to the Front lines,
having them Share their armor more so than they currently do sitting back at 950m

Which basically is trying to force "other players" to play MWO "your way" versus how they would like to play MWO. Thus, due to the inherent selfish nature of the request (intended or not)... "I'm out!"

[Threat Doc]

Almond Brown, on 24 March 2017 - 08:46 AM, said:

Another "just can't vote". You were doing so well with the OP right until...

Which basically is trying to force "other players" to play MWO "your way" versus how they would like to play MWO. Thus, due to the inherent selfish nature of the request (intended or not)... "I'm out!"

I'm afraid I have to agree... it is not for the gun bunny's or the laser brains to tell me how I should play. My job, as an individual driving a support 'Mech, is to help my team mates, to the best of my personal ability and with the tools provided within the game and by those self-same team mates, to win. For me, as an LRM-'Mech driver, that means I stay close enough to the larger contiguous group of friendlies, so if I'm jumped by an opponent, I can get into the midst of my guys and they can help me get rid of the opponent, but far enough away that I can have a better opportunity of being in an LOS position, but I can also fire over obstacles if necessary, and still have that protection. For me, sharing armor is committing suicide AND taking a true combat multiplier away from the very people who are throwing a hissy fit over taking LRM hits.

The attitude of ballistic and laser concentrated 'Mech drivers is what actually needs to be changed, and that might take some appropriate modifications to LRMs. Long-Range Missiles are the most prejudiced weapon in the game, and we need to get that perception change.

So, Andi, keep up your crusade and let's see what can be done. The first question, and perhaps you can find this out, that SHOULD be asked, has to go to PGI... what elements and settings are there to LRMs in the game?

Edited by Threat Doc, 24 March 2017 - 09:38 AM.

[dario03]

Lyoto Machida, on 24 March 2017 - 08:18 AM, said:

Maybe people like to try out weapons that have been recently changed or something.

Pretty funny they can handle direct fire and laser spam but couldn't handle 175m/s LRM fire though...

I'm sure most people do like trying changes out. But in this case it was run lrms or get no damage.

[Andi Nagasia]

Almond Brown, on 24 March 2017 - 08:46 AM, said:

Another "just can't vote". You were doing so well with the OP right until...

Which basically is trying to force "other players" to play MWO "your way" versus how they would like to play MWO. Thus, due to the inherent selfish nature of the request (intended or not)... "I'm out!"

their was a Smiley at the end of the Sentence for a reason, it was to make a joke,

yes that is what people often complain about when it comes to LRM Boats and how some Act,
to do so and act that way is considered not helping the team as much as you could be,

that said, i often Run Fun over viable Builds (PPC LCT), i would never say you have to play this way only,
but in that i also acknowledge some ways to play like some builds are more viable than others,

recognizing a move efficant way of play and telling others about isnt about forcing others to play a certain way,
by all means play how ever you want, but know some ways are more efficient than others,

[KingCobra]

Andi I will put my 2 cents in this topic I feel the range of LRMS are fine firing time is ok lock time is ok.

If there is one thing wrong with LRMS it is there ARC it seems they hit you a lot even behind tall cover of a hill or building?
To me it says the Missile arc is way to high or the missiles are acting like MechAssault 2 weapons which would go through buildings around everything like Cruise missiles.

Edited by KingCobra, 24 March 2017 - 02:13 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Threat Doc, on 24 March 2017 - 09:37 AM, said:

The attitude of ballistic and laser concentrated 'Mech drivers is what actually needs to be changed, and that might take some appropriate modifications to LRMs. Long-Range Missiles are the most prejudiced weapon in the game, and we need to get that perception change.

So, Andi, keep up your crusade and let's see what can be done. The first question, and perhaps you can find this out, that SHOULD be asked, has to go to PGI... what elements and settings are there to LRMs in the game?

i think its more about targeting and info Gathering needing abit of a rework,

the PTS4(Info Warfare) was great,
but because of alot of bad publicity around Targeted Laser Range Decay(with out a lock Lasers had -30% Range),
the entirety of PTS4 was dropped, although many still liked what it held other than Targeted Laser Range Decay,
as such PGI has said they will revisit PTS-IW(Info Warfare) again at a later date, which i hope they do,

[Threat Doc]

KingCobra, on 24 March 2017 - 02:12 PM, said:

Andi I will put my 2 cents in this topic I feel the range of LRMS are fine firing time is ok lock time is ok.

If there is one thing wrong with LRMS it is there ARC it seems they hit you a lot even behind tall cover of a hill or building?
To me it says the Missile arc is way to high or the missiles are acting like MechAssault 2 weapons which would go through buildings around everything like Cruise missiles.

I HEAVILY disagree with this. I watch the arc on my missile clusters quite a lot, and that arc is not very high at all. Are you sure you're not just behind buildings in a lower part of the map when this happens to you?

Also, I've noticed that, when I hit 'Mechs behind buildings, it's only actually a few LRMs, not the whole batch, that hits, as most of the LRMs are just impacting on top or at the side of the building.

[Threat Doc]

Andi Nagasia, on 24 March 2017 - 02:13 PM, said:

i think its more about targeting and info Gathering needing abit of a rework

Well, but that's what I'm saying... let's get everything that affects LRMs, see if we can study it, or you study it and bring a non-classified version to the forums, and let's see what can be done to square all of this away.

[Deathlike]

The best thing PGI could actually do for LRMs is to actually NERF its max range.

The reason for this is that despite having an incredibly large max range, the effective range is a lot less. It's the conundrum that the PPC+ERPPC face every time velocity is adjusted or even talked about.

The truth is that LRMs need a mechanical change fundamentally, but for the sake of everyone involved.. nerfing LRM range is beneficial to everyone involved. Here's 3 quick reasons...

1) True effective range of LRMs is admittedly closer to mid-range... like 500 to 600m. The closer you are to your target (outside of min range), the more effective LRMs are. This is indisputable.

2) Most bad LRM boats camp too far on the outskirts of the effective range. Assuming the target has any level of intelligence at the extreme ranges, the LRMs are simply ineffective more often than not.

3) Increasing velocity solely has its own set of problems.. making them imbalanced in certain ways. I'm not saying velocity increases aren't on the table, but it would have to come at the expense of damage... Mechanical changes IMO are better suited for this...

I keep talking about mechanical changes for LRMs.. and one of the changes that makes the most sense to me is that velocity of the LRM is weak/flat up to its minimum range. Velocity would then increase/accelerate by distance... as the velocity of a weapon makes it a lot more effective... so up to a certain distance (somewhere beyond 500-600m), it would be at its fastest velocity and actually have some value at the range it is supposed to dominate in. Otherwise, it's never going to really live up to its weapon design.


Point being... max range reduction is the optimal solution here (capped at 600m or so) unless PGI decides it's "capable" of redesigning the LRM mechanics to favor velocity changes depending on distance traveled.

[Andi Nagasia]

KingCobra, on 24 March 2017 - 02:12 PM, said:

Andi I will put my 2 cents in this topic I feel the range of LRMS are fine firing time is ok lock time is ok.

If there is one thing wrong with LRMS it is there ARC it seems they hit you a lot even behind tall cover of a hill or building?
To me it says the Missile arc is way to high or the missiles are acting like MechAssault 2 weapons which would go through buildings around everything like Cruise missiles.

i would support perhaps a slight Decrease in Arc but not too much,
LRMs still need to be able to safely shoot over the heads of their Allies to attack their Enemies,
which i feel is one of the best characteristics if not the best characteristic of LRMs in general,
such would also help in areas with lower ceilings, such as LowerCenter HPG or Crimson,

Threat Doc, on 24 March 2017 - 02:31 PM, said:

Well, but that's what I'm saying... let's get everything that affects LRMs, see if we can study it, or you study it and bring a non-classified version to the forums, and let's see what can be done to square all of this away.

well their have been many Studies of LRMs here lets see if i can find a Topic where i Compiled a Few,

(Ultimate Lrm Spread Topic! Normalize Lrm Spread?)
however the LRM Spreads has since been changed because of Said Topic to
Type,....Spread,...Cooldown,.....(Clan)
LRM5,....4.2m........3.25sec,....(3.50sec)
LRM10,..4.2m........3.70sec,....(4.00sec)
LRM15,..5.2m........4.00sec,....(4.30sec)
LRM20,..5.2m........4.30sec,....(4.60sec)
(LRMs have since been Normalized, Spread to 4-5 & Cooldown to 3.5-4.5)

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 24 March 2017 - 02:52 PM.