220 replies to this topic

[Jep Jorgensson]

Andi Nagasia, on 01 June 2017 - 06:40 AM, said:

12v10 wouldnt fix anything, ant this point it would break balance more than it would fix it,
also that 6% difference(53%) between IS and Clan, which isnt much at all, its not perfect but its very good,
id be willing to say you will find more imbalance in ISvIS & ClanvClan, Chassis to Chassis balance,

But again we are getting of topic,

That was how they balanced it in the game source material. Are you saying that they were wrong?

[Andi Nagasia]

Jep Jorgensson, on 01 June 2017 - 08:30 AM, said:

That was how they balanced it in the game source material. Are you saying that they were wrong?

actually yes yes i am, TT also had Battle Value, which balanced based on what a mech had on it,
by the way, TT was far from perfectly balanced, and certain combos of mechs could be very over powered,

[cyb3rj4ck]

darqsyde, on 30 May 2017 - 12:30 PM, said:

You might want to wiat for MRMs before doing anything to LRMs in direct fire mode.

Whoa. Wait. WHAT? We're actually going to get MRMs at some point?!?!?!?!?! I love those bad boys!!!

[Lightfoot]

Artemis is not a 40 percent tracking buff. I have to say prove it because in reality Artemis kills 10% faster than non-Artemis. So reducing it to 30% would result in a change to 7% faster. Current Artemis is just a waste of tonnage and that's the problem. TAG works better than Artemis by far so something is not aligning correctly. It's two different effects maybe or coding.

[Andi Nagasia]

@Lightfoot,
O your right, its actually 35%ish, just checked in game, well ill rework all the initial stats, thanks for noticing,

Edited by Andi Nagasia, 01 June 2017 - 11:56 AM.

[The Lobsters]

Lightfoot, on 01 June 2017 - 11:51 AM, said:

Artemis is not a 40 percent tracking buff. I have to say prove it because in reality Artemis kills 10% faster than non-Artemis. So reducing it to 30% would result in a change to 7% faster. Current Artemis is just a waste of tonnage and that's the problem. TAG works better than Artemis by far so something is not aligning correctly. It's two different effects maybe or coding.

Artemis buff is 33%, tag is 25%. TTK varies with target mech. For instance artemis will kill an atlas 25% better (based on personal tests with unit members) It scales better with larger targets.

Here's some spread data

Aside from the better spread from arty over tag, artemis only requires LOS from cockpit to give it's bonus, tag needs LOS from hardpoint, and to be aimed

Artemis is only not worth it if you are planning on hiding in cover using vicarious locks (which you shouldn't). For most situations artemis is better. The savings you make on tonnage swapping to a tag only means you have to spam more missiles.

Nerf the artemis lock time bonus from indirect fire and much of the lurm hate will disappear.



.

Edited by The Lobsters, 01 June 2017 - 12:31 PM.

[Jep Jorgensson]

cyb3rj4ck, on 01 June 2017 - 11:50 AM, said:

Whoa. Wait. WHAT? We're actually going to get MRMs at some point?!?!?!?!?! I love those bad boys!!!

You did not hear about this?

Civil War Update

Btw, since LRM range has been nerfed, so will your MRM range as well, compliments of PGI. How does that make you feel?

The Lobsters, on 01 June 2017 - 12:27 PM, said:

Artemis buff is 33%, tag is 25%. TTK varies with target mech. For instance artemis will kill an atlas 25% better (based on personal tests with unit members) It scales better with larger targets.

Here's some spread data

Aside from the better spread from arty over tag, artemis only requires LOS from cockpit to give it's bonus, tag needs LOS from hardpoint, and to be aimed

Artemis is only not worth it if you are planning on hiding in cover using vicarious locks (which you shouldn't). For most situations artemis is better. The savings you make on tonnage swapping to a tag only means you have to spam more missiles.

Nerf the artemis lock time bonus from indirect fire and much of the lurm hate will disappear.



.

Wrong. It will NEVER disappear. LRM haters never run out of hate.

Edited by Jep Jorgensson, 01 June 2017 - 08:24 PM.

[zortesh]

^ Wait i thought artemis locktime bonus only applied with los?

Actually looking at your spread data I'm kinda surprised narc isn't as good as artemis i always assumed they were equivalent...

Now I'm wondering if i should take advantage of this lil line from the wiki when using my narctarts.

Quote

Artemis replaces all bonuses fromNARCeven if Artemis does not have LOS

Also I'd totally support buffing stuff that's tagged or narced or directly locked by the lrmboat... and nerfing the hell out of indirect locks.

Edited by zortesh, 01 June 2017 - 02:43 PM.

[Andi Nagasia]

zortesh, on 01 June 2017 - 02:42 PM, said:

^ Wait i thought artemis locktime bonus only applied with los?

the 50% lock time applies to all locks, SSRMs also benefit even if you have no LRMs,
its more a problem with the code, and how it all works, which is why,

[Jiang Wei]

Indirect locks are already garbage.

Its kinda funny... you got one group of people who say LRMs are too strong and want them nerfed, and another group of people who scream at you in game for taking LRMs for being too useless.

Edited by Jiang Wei, 02 June 2017 - 11:43 AM.

[Andi Nagasia]

Jiang Wei, on 02 June 2017 - 11:39 AM, said:

Indirect locks are already garbage.

Its kinda funny... you got one group of people who say LRMs are too strong and want them nerfed, and another group of people who scream at you in game for taking LRMs for being too useless.

well what i am proposing is to give a slight nerf to unassisted Indirect fire,
wail increasing the viability and reliability of all other forms of LRM play, both Solo & Team LRM play,

[Jiang Wei]

Andi Nagasia, on 02 June 2017 - 11:56 AM, said:

well what i am proposing is to give a slight nerf to unassisted Indirect fire,
wail increasing the viability and reliability of all other forms of LRM play, both Solo & Team LRM play,

What would the nerf be? I was thinking the super high arc .... is a little too high.

[Jep Jorgensson]

Jiang Wei, on 02 June 2017 - 01:01 PM, said:

What would the nerf be? I was thinking the super high arc .... is a little too high.

He wants to grow the already bad spread out even further in an attempt to make LRM's more like ATM's (LOS or they will be garbage) and require LRM boats to bring 1-2 other mechs with TAG and NARC to get the full benefits back. Does that sound good to you? That sounds like discrimination against solo LRM boaters to me.

Bad enough LRM's got nerfed with range in the last patch and both LRM's and SSRM's got nerfed the patch before that by making it so that they cannot target turrets in escort and incursion, now that I think about it. There are countless bugs that have been crawling around for weeks or even months and holes for hackers to exploit all over the game and despite all that, where does PGI put their efforts and manpower? Into nerfing weapons many already consider to be worthless. Anybody else notice all this?

Edited by Jep Jorgensson, 02 June 2017 - 11:43 PM.

[zortesh]

Jep Jorgensson, on 02 June 2017 - 11:27 PM, said:

He wants to grow the already bad spread out even further in an attempt to make LRM's more like ATM's (LOS or they will be garbage) and require LRM boats to bring 1-2 other mechs with TAG and NARC to get the full benefits back. Does that sound good to you? That sounds like discrimination against solo LRM boaters to me.

Bad enough LRM's got nerfed with range in the last patch and both LRM's and SSRM's got nerfed the patch before that by making it so that they cannot target turrets in escort and incursion, now that I think about it. There are countless bugs that have been crawling around for weeks or even months and holes for hackers to exploit all over the game and despite all that, where does PGI put their efforts and manpower? Into nerfing weapons many already consider to be worthless. Anybody else notice all this?

I solo lrmboat, mainly because in a group I'd take real weapons, but mostly becuase poptarting narc beacons in quick-play is hilarious...

I love the idea of indirect locks being nerfed and narc/tag/directfire getting huge buffs.

he also put forward an insane velocity buff 80 meters per second faster... which would cuase instant lermageddon.

[Jep Jorgensson]

zortesh, on 03 June 2017 - 01:43 AM, said:

I solo lrmboat, mainly because in a group I'd take real weapons, but mostly becuase poptarting narc beacons in quick-play is hilarious...

I love the idea of indirect locks being nerfed and narc/tag/directfire getting huge buffs.

he also put forward an insane velocity buff 80 meters per second faster... which would cuase instant lermageddon.

So you do not see LRM's as a real weapon and you support them getting nerfed. That seems a bit contradictory to me. If a weapon sucks, then why nerf it? It does not make any sense. Do you also eat soup with a knife?

Andi Nagasia, on 02 June 2017 - 11:56 AM, said:

well what i am proposing is to give a slight nerf to unassisted Indirect fire,
wail increasing the viability and reliability of all other forms of LRM play, both Solo & Team LRM play,

Still no. It makes no difference what you offer in exchange for nerfing them. Even if we went along with what you are suggesting and it all happened like you suggested, how long do you think it will take the LRM haters to rush to the forum crying about them again? As soon as PGI announces it. Not when they release it, but when they announce it. After the release, how long do you think it will take PGI to cave into their ever louder and growing demands? One patch, maybe two? And then the buffs will be gone but the nerf will remain to pacify the haters. PGI givith and PGI takes away. I refuse to go down that road. No way in Hell!

[Andi Nagasia]

Jep Jorgensson, on 04 June 2017 - 09:44 AM, said:

Still no. It makes no difference what you offer in exchange for nerfing them. Even if we went along with what you are suggesting and it all happened like you suggested, how long do you think it will take the LRM haters to rush to the forum crying about them again? As soon as PGI announces it. Not when they release it, but when they announce it. After the release, how long do you think it will take PGI to cave into their ever louder and growing demands? One patch, maybe two? And then the buffs will be gone but the nerf will remain to pacify the haters. PGI givith and PGI takes away. I refuse to go down that road. No way in Hell!

so your saying MWO should never change because people will complain?
im ganna say no, it doesnt matter how many complain or how loud they complain,
i feel this change will help the system, and that this needs to happen to more forward,

look how many people complained about the Skill tree,
and we still got it, and you know what, many of the complains were unfounded or exaggerated,
Change has to happen, and people need to know nothing that stays the same forever lives forever,

[Ted Wayz]

Andi Nagasia, on 01 June 2017 - 11:42 AM, said:

actually yes yes i am, TT also had Battle Value, which balanced based on what a mech had on it,
by the way, TT was far from perfectly balanced, and certain combos of mechs could be very over powered,

Yeah, but you could control very easily what people brought to the battle as a GM.

And there was back story and context to why you were playing.

And mechs had roles.

And your pilots had the skills, not the mechs.

And there was evolving strategy. And more ways to win the engagement than just killing.

Don't bring up TT if you really do not want to see how shallow MWO is.

[Andi Nagasia]

Ted Wayz, on 04 June 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

Yeah, but you could control very easily what people brought to the battle as a GM.

something you have much less control over in an Online game, you dont have a GM over looking each match,

Ted Wayz, on 04 June 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

And there was back story and context to why you were playing.

People RP in MWO as well, its just not built into MWO, i do think it should be but i digress,

Ted Wayz, on 04 June 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

And mechs had roles.

Mechs in MWO have Roles too, just because they arnt the same as in TT doesnt make them less so,
we have Brawlers, Snipers, DPS Masters, LRM Boats, Scrapers, and Skirmishers,

Ted Wayz, on 04 June 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

And your pilots had the skills, not the mechs.

yes true, but this matters little, as its just a migration from one form to another,

Ted Wayz, on 04 June 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

And there was evolving strategy. And more ways to win the engagement than just killing.

well some game modes in MWO are just skirmish no matter how you play them and i agree that needs to change,
but still their are other ways to win, Conquest is a great example of Objectives working as intended,

Ted Wayz, on 04 June 2017 - 10:07 AM, said:

Don't bring up TT if you really do not want to see how shallow MWO is.

MWO isnt TT, you can say well TT has Lore built in but then again so does MWO,
maybe not as much as their should be but its still there,

MWO also has a Deep Mech Customization that you really didnt normally experience in TT,
as most GMs, at least the ones i played with, as well as ones at events kept to Stock Mech Mode,

[Weeny Machine]

Andi Nagasia, on 02 June 2017 - 11:56 AM, said:

well what i am proposing is to give a slight nerf to unassisted Indirect fire,
wail increasing the viability and reliability of all other forms of LRM play, both Solo & Team LRM play,

This won't help. As I said time and again: the easy access to the indirect fire option is what polarizes people. It is simply bad mechanic in a shooter

[Ruar]

Bush Hopper, on 04 June 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

This won't help. As I said time and again: the easy access to the indirect fire option is what polarizes people. It is simply bad mechanic in a shooter

This is very true. MWO went a step further and made indirect homing, which is never a good idea. I think the first step in any LRM rework is to get rid of the homing mechanic. The second step is making LRMs primarily a direct fire weapon with the option to be used indirectly. At that point it's just a matter of what mechanic to use to make indirect fire happen. With the way MWO works I think the best method is for a spotter to ID a target, the LRM mech take about 1.5 seconds to program the missiles for that spot, then when fired the missiles travel to that point on the ground in the same fashion as what happens now when lock is lost. Increase the spread and indirect is now an area effect option that requires a spotter but isn't powerful enough to destroy a mech unless there are multiple LRM mechs all saturating an area. So good for FP or other coordinated modes but not so great for QP.

LRMs would be a great support weapon to give you some punch at long range without forcing you to hold locks while at the same time offering some indirect capability if the situation warrants.