I am assuming LRMs are so heavily nerfed in MWO because players will always boat LRMs if they are any good. Well what if they couldn't boat LRMs due to ammo consumption? Then LRMs could be made good enough to be effective with a standard Battle Tech load-out, like 2 launchers, knowing if they carried many more they would quickly run out of ammo.
Discuss.
0
Balance Lrms With Ammo Counts?
Started by Lightfoot, Mar 25 2017 01:26 PM
8 replies to this topic
#1
Posted 25 March 2017 - 01:26 PM
#2
Posted 25 March 2017 - 03:59 PM
I doubt a lot of people would be happy if a weapon with aim assist/missile lock was allowed to become meta.
As it is the lrm situation as I see it is as follows:
Lrms are an easy weapon for a new player to pick up (Good)
Lrms are most effective against less skilled/knowledgeable players and worst against the more skilled/knowledgeable (Good)
Lrms have instruments that make them more effective, tag uav, narc, teammate target locks (Good)
Lrms have unique abilites, indirect fire (Good)
Lrms rely on team work, teammate target locks (Good)
Lrms can be countered, ecm, bap, LOS, flight time, terrain (Good)
I dabble in lrms in my view they are ok
If they were that bad I doubt we would see as many as we do in quick play or FW
and they arn't that good that you see them much in comp
Seems balanced
As it is the lrm situation as I see it is as follows:
Lrms are an easy weapon for a new player to pick up (Good)
Lrms are most effective against less skilled/knowledgeable players and worst against the more skilled/knowledgeable (Good)
Lrms have instruments that make them more effective, tag uav, narc, teammate target locks (Good)
Lrms have unique abilites, indirect fire (Good)
Lrms rely on team work, teammate target locks (Good)
Lrms can be countered, ecm, bap, LOS, flight time, terrain (Good)
I dabble in lrms in my view they are ok
If they were that bad I doubt we would see as many as we do in quick play or FW
and they arn't that good that you see them much in comp
Seems balanced
Edited by OZHomerOZ, 25 March 2017 - 04:04 PM.
#3
Posted 26 March 2017 - 05:08 PM
LRMs should be as viable a weapon as Lasers or Gauss Rifles or any of the other "comp" weapons. That they are not shows that experienced players know they are not competitive and to not use them.
Once upon a time LRMs were competitive for a skilled LRM user. Prior to January 2015's patch to be sure. Something happened at around this time that made LRMs what we have now. The non-competitive new player weapon you describe. I want LRMs to be competitive again and I know LRM-boating might be the reason LRMs were made non-competitive. Certainly many Clan Assault mechs can boat them. However, if you limit ammo counts players can't boat LRMs effectively. Canon is 120 missiles per ton, not 180.
I just know that I used to be able to take my Mad Dog to drops with Artemis LRM 40 and a few lasers and be effective and that load-out would be useless in MWO's current LRM balancing, but the mech's load-out is about as canon as an LRM based mech can be. It should work fine in a BattleTech game.
Once upon a time LRMs were competitive for a skilled LRM user. Prior to January 2015's patch to be sure. Something happened at around this time that made LRMs what we have now. The non-competitive new player weapon you describe. I want LRMs to be competitive again and I know LRM-boating might be the reason LRMs were made non-competitive. Certainly many Clan Assault mechs can boat them. However, if you limit ammo counts players can't boat LRMs effectively. Canon is 120 missiles per ton, not 180.
I just know that I used to be able to take my Mad Dog to drops with Artemis LRM 40 and a few lasers and be effective and that load-out would be useless in MWO's current LRM balancing, but the mech's load-out is about as canon as an LRM based mech can be. It should work fine in a BattleTech game.
#4
Posted 27 March 2017 - 05:09 PM
In the Lore lerm boats were SUPPORT platforms
Can't expect a SUPPORT platform weapon to be as good as a front line weapons platform
Sounds like you have reached T3 and have begun to have games against higher tier player against whom LRM's are less effective. That's normal.
There's a ton of LRM threads with more info about it, maybe check them out.
I just don't think a weapon that does the aiming for you should be allowed to be the best weapon in the game.
Can't expect a SUPPORT platform weapon to be as good as a front line weapons platform
Sounds like you have reached T3 and have begun to have games against higher tier player against whom LRM's are less effective. That's normal.
There's a ton of LRM threads with more info about it, maybe check them out.
I just don't think a weapon that does the aiming for you should be allowed to be the best weapon in the game.
#5
Posted 27 March 2017 - 05:16 PM
Lightfoot, on 25 March 2017 - 01:26 PM, said:
I am assuming LRMs are so heavily nerfed in MWO because players will always boat LRMs if they are any good. Well what if they couldn't boat LRMs due to ammo consumption? Then LRMs could be made good enough to be effective with a standard Battle Tech load-out, like 2 launchers, knowing if they carried many more they would quickly run out of ammo.
Discuss.
Discuss.
Ammo consumption is already very high as is. Making it even worse is a bad idea.
#6
Posted 29 March 2017 - 08:32 PM
OZHomerOZ, on 27 March 2017 - 05:09 PM, said:
In the Lore lerm boats were SUPPORT platforms
Can't expect a SUPPORT platform weapon to be as good as a front line weapons platform
Sounds like you have reached T3 and have begun to have games against higher tier player against whom LRM's are less effective. That's normal.
There's a ton of LRM threads with more info about it, maybe check them out.
I just don't think a weapon that does the aiming for you should be allowed to be the best weapon in the game.
Can't expect a SUPPORT platform weapon to be as good as a front line weapons platform
Sounds like you have reached T3 and have begun to have games against higher tier player against whom LRM's are less effective. That's normal.
There's a ton of LRM threads with more info about it, maybe check them out.
I just don't think a weapon that does the aiming for you should be allowed to be the best weapon in the game.
I have been Tier 3 since they added Tiers, though I am about to hit 2, so my experience in-game is not Tier related. LRMs are just very bad right now, I play many matches where there are no LRMs used at all, so they need a buff. They were better, and pretty well balanced as support weapons since they were never good enough to compete with direct-fire weapons.
What is new is a lot of mechs that can boat missiles so it's likely that if a mech is boating them it's like 4x LRM15. So to balance that LRMs have to be pretty useless in a more normal load-out. But the 4x LRM15 and ups have high ammo consumption so perhaps it is better to have working LRMs like they were prior to January 2015, but with lower ammo per ton.
Right now I just wouldn't bother bringing LRMs for support or anything else. Not even good for boating really, but I think that is how they were balanced, to nerf LRM boating. But that removes LRMs from gameplay.
Many players do not like guided missiles, but they are a part of BattleTech and the MechWarrior experience. MWO's 'No LRMs' is kind of a false comfort zone. If LRMs ever work correctly again you will immediately see 5-7 continuous complaint threads on the forums because players want that comfort zone and are frustrated at not being able to cross large open expanses with impunity. Even support weapons have to be respected.
#7
Posted 30 March 2017 - 04:47 PM
Games with mostly T1 and T2 players often feature no LRM's, because their are better weapons available and those players know this.
On the other hand T4 and T5 players may or may not agree that LRM's need a buff. Especially the ones that die a lot to LRM's
I still see enough LRM's in my games which mostly are solo pug games.
Also you said yourself your almost T2, so it could be matchmaker is adding you to higher tier games more than before, so less lrms about.
My own personal experience with LRMS is that I can wreak T3 to T5 players with nothing but Quad LRM10's and narc.
However T1 and T2 give me more trouble, so I gotta work hard to do well and even then it's not consistent.
So in my opinion LRM's are about right
On the other hand T4 and T5 players may or may not agree that LRM's need a buff. Especially the ones that die a lot to LRM's
I still see enough LRM's in my games which mostly are solo pug games.
Also you said yourself your almost T2, so it could be matchmaker is adding you to higher tier games more than before, so less lrms about.
My own personal experience with LRMS is that I can wreak T3 to T5 players with nothing but Quad LRM10's and narc.
However T1 and T2 give me more trouble, so I gotta work hard to do well and even then it's not consistent.
So in my opinion LRM's are about right
#8
Posted 30 March 2017 - 05:09 PM
I'm meh about lrms being a Tier 2 borderline Tier 1 player that lrms are rarely an issue often being easy to avoid and not to mention kill
Usually when I die to lrms is because I was caught in a bad position or was dead anyway so moot point
Usually when I die to lrms is because I was caught in a bad position or was dead anyway so moot point
#9
Posted 30 March 2017 - 08:08 PM
I also play a Tier 4 alt for Inner Sphere tech and I am rarely seeing LRMs at Tier 4 as well, unless they are boats, which hit pretty hard. But LRMs should not be balanced around a few boaters.
Very few LRMs in matches I play, = no one complaining about being killed by LRMs. Which doesn't mean they are working, it means they don't work anymore.
MechWarrior is much better with the added dimension of LRMs. It breaks up the Laser or Autocannon only gameplay with a third countermeasure tactic.
Very few LRMs in matches I play, = no one complaining about being killed by LRMs. Which doesn't mean they are working, it means they don't work anymore.
MechWarrior is much better with the added dimension of LRMs. It breaks up the Laser or Autocannon only gameplay with a third countermeasure tactic.
Edited by Lightfoot, 30 March 2017 - 08:14 PM.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users