106 replies to this topic

[Mechammer555]

Ghogiel, on 29 May 2017 - 07:26 PM, said:

My personal problem with lurms is just because my back gets sore humping these potato sacks every match.

Now I know this blind old mans 1000+ damage matches are not for naught! You should just be glad that I softened them up for you, so you could scarf up those easy kills...

[Pjwned]

Ultimax, on 29 May 2017 - 08:26 PM, said:

1) The skill tree doesn't encourage mixed builds, and realistically it is not smart to build that way with missiles.

Are you serious? The vast majority of the firepower tree is generic range, cooldown, and heat skills with some specialty skills available if you go out of your way to get them.

You might not, for example, have as many velocity or missile spread skills if you pair up some LRMs with a larger assortment of lasers as your primary weapons, but that alone doesn't make the difference for making LRMs worth bringing or not.

The rest of the skill tree doesn't care about your weapons.

And you know why it's not smart to build that way with missiles? Because their spread keeps getting nerfed and bigger launchers still have unduly increased spread and ECM is still unbalanced, etc; it would be smart to build that way if LRMs were as reliable as they should be.

Quote

2) You missed the part where I said buffs. LRMs would need significant buffs to compete with direct fire weapons, but as long as the mid-tier potatoes cling to their indirect fire through shared locks & aim-assist - those buffs will never come.

1) Indirect fire is a part of the game just as much as LRMs are, and nerfing the **** out of it because people throw a tantrum over dying to it is not acceptable.

2) LRMs would never ever be buffed so much that they would be truly competitive with other direct fire weapons, because while they would end up being better at direct fire (than they are now) they still wouldn't be as good and indirect fire would be essentially removed; it's stupid to think otherwise.

Edited by Pjwned, 29 May 2017 - 09:06 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Ultimax, on 29 May 2017 - 07:55 PM, said:

So what you are saying is that the general playerbase all has to pay an SP tax &/or tonnage tax on their builds to put up with the mechanics of only one single weapon system and if those mechanics didn't exist - they could build their mechs normally?

they dont have to, but they can, LRMs have many counters,
you dont need to invest its just help you Fight LRMs if you,

Ultimax, on 29 May 2017 - 07:55 PM, said:

If one weapon system, alone among all others, requires a bunch of extra spend on every build - then there might actually be a problem with the mechanics behind that weapon system.

Not coincidentally, those mechanics* once removed would allow LRMs to get real buffs so they could move beyond the mediocre-tier potato farm weapon of choice and maybe actually be less toxic and more competitive.

*Aim-assist, Shared locks, Indirect Fire

Aim-assist?
yes LRMs aim for center mass but they spread much like all other spread weapons(SRM/LBX)
yes if you hold a lock they are more likely to hit Center, but also due to their travel time they are unreliable,
i can look to a twisting target and wait for them to face me to hit them with SRMs/LBX for maximum effectiveness,

Shared locks?
yes this is a thing but remember that locking also shows you information about the target as well,
so if your heading into battle you can see where the target is weakest before entering combat,
this helps immensely, in more competitive matches, calling out targets and weak points,

Indirect Fire?
LRMs have it, its a BattleTech thing and unlikely to change, not that it doesnt need to be tweaked,
personally i would decrease spread when Indirectly fired, and increase spread with LOS,


remember an LBX20 has a spread of 1m, an LRM20 has a spread of 5.2m,
i feel in order to make LRMs better they should decrease Spread when in LOS to 2m,
and increase Spread when out of LOS to 6.2m(this needs to be done for all LRM types)

[Wintersdark]

Ultimax, on 29 May 2017 - 07:55 PM, said:

So what you are saying is that the general playerbase all has to pay an SP tax &/or tonnage tax on their builds to put up with the mechanics of only one single weapon system and if those mechanics didn't exist - they could build their mechs normally?


If one weapon system, alone among all others, requires a bunch of extra spend on every build - then there might actually be a problem with the mechanics behind that weapon system.

Not coincidentally, those mechanics* once removed would allow LRMs to get real buffs so they could move beyond the mediocre-tier potato farm weapon of choice and maybe actually be less toxic and more competitive.


*Aim-assist, Shared locks, Indirect Fire

No. The player case doesn't have to invest in anything. I don't, and WAY less than 1 in 10 of my deaths are even remotely related to LRM's (that includes taking a significant amount of lurm damage then dying to something else).

But, for players who didn't learn to play before radar derp was a thing, those tools exist.

And those tools have other uses too. An Overload boosted mech will cut down a lot of incoming streaks and SRM's, and ECM mech also cloaks allies from sensors, etc. These tools are absolutely not mandatory because LRM's ARE STILL BAD WEAPONS, but they ARE available if you're having trouble with them.

And seriously, mounting an AMS unit and a ton of ammo costs you a DHS and a bit; that doesn't ruin a build. Nobody suffers for mounting it, and indeed they're helping their team win by doing so (as there's a high probability of LRM-vulnerable potatoes on any given team.



So no, I totally can't agree with you here.


1) The tools aren't necessary because LRM's are fully manageable without them.
2) The tools ARE available if you want to use them.
3) the tools all provide more use than purely LRM protection.

---

What I don't get is the complaint that taking AMS is somehow a huge burden. After all, we all take largely max armor (deadsides notwithstanding); you could shed lots of armor and take another few DHS/MOAR GUNZZ.

An optimal build is the one that wins matches. You always need to invest some of your Mechs capacity in defense. When there's lots of LRM's around, investing​ in AMS is functionally identical to investing in more armor.

[MustrumRidcully]

Pjwned, on 29 May 2017 - 08:47 PM, said:

Are you serious? The vast majority of the firepower tree is generic range, cooldown, and heat skills with some specialty skills available if you go out of your way to get them.

That is true, however,if it was me,I'd roll these "special weapon skills" all together into one or two skills that buff all attributes unique to weapons.

Weapon Specialization: Spread Reduction (Missiles + LBX), U/AC Jam Reduction, Laser Duration, Velocity
Weapon Efficiency: Laser Duration, Extra Ammo, Extended Electronics Disruption*

The skill tree should leave no excuses behind for boating. It won't be enough, of course.

AMS could probably be also designed differently for "anti-boating". Give AMS an interception chance per missile entering range. If it doesn't proc, the missile will get through the AMS no question asked and no AMS projectiles wasted. Then still add a maximum threshold on how many missiles can be intercepted in a short time frame.
If the proc chance is 50 % per AMS and Missile, and the missiles intercepted per second is 20, then an LRM 40 or an LRM 60 boat would lose 20 missiles, and an LRM 20 boat would lose only 10. The result is that a smaller number of missiles is still viable as it can actually get through an AMS system (even through multiple, actually - 2 AMS would only lead to a total intercept chance of 75 %).

The AMS skill could keep raising the damage, so AMS can potentially counter 30 missiles from a 60 LRM boat, but it would still only intercept 5 missiles from an LRM 10 boat or 10 from an LRM 20 boat. The result is that missiles are more useful as a side weapon, and boating is somewhat less useful.


*) Something new for PPCs, more for fluff, but at least a reason to also consider this skill node.

[Karl Streiger]

Maybe if AMS would be more successful in shooting down SRMs or more important Streaks they would have broader usage.
Although I've seen a Nova S lateley - with no AMS.... good for us both i had 3.... but its very lame when there are no LRMs in the game - happens from time to time.... then I'm sitting on 1.5-4.5ton wasted (but i have fitted all of my Mechs with AMS - had before in CB and its ok to have it now again)

[Ced Riggs]

Daily reminder that AMS also helps against SRMs and streaks, and ECM helps against Streaks, too - if you speced it.
Also ECM and AMS, when used by more people, make NARCs useless beyond drawing a dorito.

Herd Immunity means, with everyone inoculated, those that can't are safer as infections don't spread. Equip AMS/ECM today, and help a buddy out. You even get credits and XP for it, it's insane. I went and added AMS/ammo to almost all mechs that can carry it now, and I am basking in the glory of shooting down lurms, SRMs, streaks until the ammo bins are dry.

[Kubernetes]

The only problem with LRMs is if they're on your team. Total waste of potato tonnage.

[meteorol]

I'm blaming the LRM users skill for my problems with lrms.

My problem with lrms: lrms are terrible, and lrm users are frequently throwing matches when they are on my team.

[BadgerBeard]

Ced Riggs, on 29 May 2017 - 11:22 PM, said:

Herd Immunity means, with everyone inoculated, those that can't are safer as infections don't spread. Equip AMS/ECM today, and help a buddy out. You even get credits and XP for it, it's insane.

Pretty much this.

While grinding out the 10k for the event I decided to experiment a little with Lrm's... from both sides. On the one hand I used a Golden boy with all the missiles, and on the other I used the "Umbrella" crab with 2 ams, 3 tons of ams ammo and all overload unlocked.

The Crab was the clear winner in XP and credits by a mile. Match after match I stayed right along with the big boys and shot down ridiculous numbers of missiles ( I believe the best was over 1k missiles destroyed), not to mention my win rate spiked upwards while in the crab. Not the most glamorous role on the battlefield perhaps, but it definitely paid out as far as getting the Linebacker faster went.

That said, piloting the GB, I could very quickly see which pilots had radar derp, ams, etc. The difference as a Lrm user between a game where I can pretty much keep the rain coming until I run dry, and the games where I will have to get up close and TAG the hell out of people just have a chance at getting a single salvo off is very noticeable. Grouped AMS is by far the most annoying though from my experiences over the last few days. 3-4 mechs each giving overlapped ams coverage means pretty much zero missiles getting through, or just a couple at best. It's extremely effective.

The GB is getting retired for the foreseeable future, AMS is going on everything I build unless I have a very good reason not to.

Disclaimer: I'm not a great player, (tier 3) so my experiences may not reflect more "advanced" high-tier gameplay.

Edit to add: The win-rate spike with the crab may also have to do with the mind-set behind it. It's very much a "I'm not leaving my wing man!" kind of play, which kept me very focused on keeping grouped up and supporting as much as possible my assaults/ heavies. At the same time using the lasers+ armour to fight whatever my heavies were fighting....this worked out rather well for me. As a relatively inexperienced player ( I've had the account for a while but have taken several long breaks) this is by far the best way to make a decent contribution to the match....more effective than boating Lrms as far as I can see.

Edited by BadgerBeard, 30 May 2017 - 12:06 AM.

[JadePanther]

didnt really use derp or AMS, didnt have problems with LRM before patch.. after patch they are much more annoying.. but we cant blame the patch cause they only got annoying after the patch right?

so lets get back to LRM change denying and pull out of the paris comstar agreements.. Cause the SKY AINT FALLING THE SKY AINT FALLING.. now YMMV here.. engine defooking may / not effect your ability to deal with them.. u might have ECM or CrapCM.. and so on and and so forth..

But there is indeed a difference afoot.. there will always be complaints about this and that.. lrms were complained beforehand there are now, and there will be in the future..

[Wintersdark]

Karl Streiger, on 29 May 2017 - 11:09 PM, said:

Maybe if AMS would be more successful in shooting down SRMs or more important Streaks they would have broader usage.
Although I've seen a Nova S lateley - with no AMS.... good for us both i had 3.... but its very lame when there are no LRMs in the game - happens from time to time.... then I'm sitting on 1.5-4.5ton wasted (but i have fitted all of my Mechs with AMS - had before in CB and its ok to have it now again)

Well, AMS with the damage bonus is EXTREMELY effective in shooting down SRM's and Streaks. Particularly when you have more than one.

---

I've been running my NVA-S tonight, and getting ~750 missiles destroyed in every match. That a hell of a lot of damage that just isn't happening.

[Dogstar]

Laser AMS is going to be very popular because current AMS runs dry after a while but lasers never run out of ammo which will make the play towards the end of the match more interesting

[patataman]

I think the ams is ok at the moment. I've been testing a few dual ams mechs I had and they work well in that task (no skills whatsoever ).

Ofc if the enemy has 3-4 lurm boats and you are the only mech with ams, it is not going to be enough...

[Vellron2005]

Novakaine, on 29 May 2017 - 07:27 PM, said:

WOW, haven't seen this one in a while.. But I agree..

FIRE ALL THE MISSILES!

I think that this topic, as well as any other LRM / Anti-LRM thread has the same conclusion..

Let's agree to disagree..

[Ultimax]

Wintersdark, on 29 May 2017 - 10:27 PM, said:

No. The player case doesn't have to invest in anything. I don't, and WAY less than 1 in 10 of my deaths are even remotely related to LRM's (that includes taking a significant amount of lurm damage then dying to something else).

But, for players who didn't learn to play before radar derp was a thing, those tools exist.

And those tools have other uses too. An Overload boosted mech will cut down a lot of incoming streaks and

You're contradicting yourself.

Players either need to invest/pay a tax or they don't. AMS is a build tax. Overload is a Tax.

Mechs that aren't Lights basically ignore streaks - so is your suggestion that Light mechs hug their big mech buddies and let AMS protect them? That's not even remotely feasible or a good suggestion..


Also you don't need to die to LRMs, ever, for it to be exceedingly clear that LRMs have an oversized impact on how matches are played (from both sides, both the LRM bringers and their targets) in QP.

Wintersdark, on 29 May 2017 - 10:27 PM, said:

And seriously, mounting an AMS unit and a ton of ammo costs you a DHS and a bit; that doesn't ruin a build. Nobody suffers for mounting it, and indeed they're helping their team win by doing so (as there's a high probability of LRM-vulnerable potatoes on any given team.

Tonnage is tonnage, crit slots are crit slots - and I see no reason that the general playerbase should be encouraged to spend tonnage, slots or SP to deal with something that only helps vs a single weapon system.


And saying that you can "just play around LRMs" without any of these things is incredibly facetious - because that's the point, you have to deal with them in particular because of the mechanics they have (when most other weapons follow pretty much the same rules, with the main change being range).


The ironic part is, if those mechanics were removed then LRMs could be buffed to compete with direct fire weapons - but as long as they retain IDF, Share Targeting & Aim-assist then any sane developer will be forced to limit their performance.

[Revis Volek]

Ultimax, on 30 May 2017 - 10:10 AM, said:

You're contradicting yourself.

Players either need to invest/pay a tax or they don't. AMS is a build tax. Overload is a Tax.

Mechs that aren't Lights basically ignore streaks - so is your suggestion that Light mechs hug their big mech buddies and let AMS protect them? That's not even remotely feasible or a good suggestion..


Also you don't need to die to LRMs, ever, for it to be exceedingly clear that LRMs have an oversized impact on how matches are played (from both sides, both the LRM bringers and their targets) in QP.






Tonnage is tonnage, crit slots are crit slots - and I see no reason that the general playerbase should be encouraged to spend tonnage, slots or SP to deal with something that only helps vs a single weapon system.


And saying that you can "just play around LRMs" without any of these things is incredibly facetious - because that's the point, you have to deal with them in particular because of the mechanics they have (when most other weapons follow pretty much the same rules, with the main change being range).


The ironic part is, if those mechanics were removed then LRMs could be buffed to compete with direct fire weapons - but as long as they retain IDF, Share Targeting & Aim-assist then any sane developer will be forced to limit their performance.

Its not a tax, taxes your are FORCED to pay like the DHS tax for IS mechs. I dont think you understand what TAX means. If you mean you dont get things for FREE anymore then you are correct but thats not a tax. You dont seem to understand what that word means...

NO one is FORCED to bring AMS but we are FORCED to pay tax so how is it tax? Hard Cover works just the same if not better then AMS but sometimes people dont have the best situational awareness so they need something to cover their ***.

Also why is a light or medium sticking with the group and protecting them while getting protected a bad idea? Or in your words, NOT REMOTELY FEASIBLE. Please explain to me in your own words why you think playing as a team in a team based shooter is a bad idea. Your grasp of the game seems to be tenuous at best dude based on what you just wrote.


Honestly where have you been? There is very little to no more investment needed to bring AMS then there ever was (aside nodes which you dont need to make your AMS work) it works just fine with no SP and just having ammo. Imagine that!

So whats wrong with LRMS having an impact on how the game is played? YOu think LRM mechs should just be useless weight on your team then? I cant see how your logic is working but i guess that is a change...

Also that last bit, how LRMS and other weapons work in this game is becoming an issue i really dont even understand what you mean there. The weapons that takes a straight line and the shortest path to the target will always be better then something you lob in the air and pray it hits. Target Share helps everyone, if i see something at 550m i can hit it with gauss or LRMS just the same so why does getting rid of that for LRM users make then any better? All i see is it making them much, much worse because now they have less info then they ever did.

We all have C3 computers in this game, get over it.

Edited by Revis Volek, 30 May 2017 - 10:33 AM.

[MechaBattler]

To be fair. I am starting to see more AMS in pug queue.

[Pjwned]

Ultimax, on 30 May 2017 - 10:10 AM, said:

You're contradicting yourself.

Players either need to invest/pay a tax or they don't. AMS is a build tax. Overload is a Tax.

If they don't need to then it's not a tax, and they demonstrably don't need to.

HURR HLURF

Quote

Mechs that aren't Lights basically ignore streaks - so is your suggestion that Light mechs hug their big mech buddies and let AMS protect them? That's not even remotely feasible or a good suggestion..

Most lights are actually fast enough that they can get away from streakboats, and they can see the mech's weapons far more often than not which should be plenty of warning to stay away from said streakboats.

And aside from that streaks are garbage exactly because "mechs that aren't lights basically ignore streaks;" unlike LRMs they actually do need to be reworked rather than just tweaked.

Quote

Tonnage is tonnage, crit slots are crit slots - and I see no reason that the general playerbase should be encouraged to spend tonnage, slots or SP to deal with something that only helps vs a single weapon system.

It also mitigates SRMs somewhat, SSRMs more so, and if an enemy mech happens to fire a NARC into your AMS then it's likely destroyed.

Cry more.

Quote

And saying that you can "just play around LRMs" without any of these things is incredibly facetious - because that's the point, you have to deal with them in particular because of the mechanics they have (when most other weapons follow pretty much the same rules, with the main change being range).

Boo-hoo bluh bluh indirect fire touched me in a bad place.

Quote

The ironic part is, if those mechanics were removed then LRMs could be buffed to compete with direct fire weapons - but as long as they retain IDF, Share Targeting & Aim-assist then any sane developer will be forced to limit their performance.

Still wrong.

Edited by Pjwned, 30 May 2017 - 11:00 AM.

[darqsyde]

Funnily enough in my LRM "boats" I rarely take AMS Overload(or indeed AMS period) or Radar Derp.

Make of that what you will.

Edited by darqsyde, 30 May 2017 - 11:18 AM.