53 replies to this topic

[FireStoat]

Kmieciu, on 21 June 2017 - 02:07 AM, said:

Now, using 3 nodes of radar derp (minimum 9 total nodes spent) you can counter 5 nodes of target decay (minimum 10 total nodes spent).

Thank you for testing this, but I'm left a bit confused from your post. At the start you affirm that 5 points of Radar Deprivation will counter any amount of Target Decay. Yet from this piece I've quoted, you asserted that 3 points in Radar deprivation from the test was enough to counter 5 points of Target Decay.

Inquiring minds want to know if that last part is legit, and 3 points is countering 5. If that is the case, does that mean that the extra 2 points of Radar Deprivation (assuming you took 5 full points) is the thing countering the game's natural 'drift' of 2 seconds of a lock once you go into cover?

[Jman5]

FireStoat, on 21 June 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

Thank you for testing this, but I'm left a bit confused from your post. At the start you affirm that 5 points of Radar Deprivation will counter any amount of Target Decay. Yet from this piece I've quoted, you asserted that 3 points in Radar deprivation from the test was enough to counter 5 points of Target Decay.

Inquiring minds want to know if that last part is legit, and 3 points is countering 5. If that is the case, does that mean that the extra 2 points of Radar Deprivation (assuming you took 5 full points) is the thing countering the game's natural 'drift' of 2 seconds of a lock once you go into cover?

https://mwomercs.com...11#entry5794111

[Maurice Thorez]

Kmieciu, on 21 June 2017 - 02:07 AM, said:

Ok guys, I've tested this issue with my unit in a private match.

Jman and Palfatreos were right.

Fully skilled Radar Deprivation breaks the lock instantly, no matter how many points of Target Decay the enemy has.

My friends confirmed they immediately lost their lock of my mech once I dropped from their sight, and I could instantly hear the sound of my mech disappearing from their sensors. (the sound Ling mech pilots repeatedly hear when they're entering the danger zone ;-))

So, the skill tree gave radar derp a big boost. Before, LRM boats using advanced target decay had a chance against mechs using radar deprivation. https://youtu.be/PYB1BS-arD4

Now, using 3 nodes of radar derp (minimum 9 total nodes spent) you can counter 5 nodes of target decay (minimum 10 total nodes spent).

Interestingly enough Radar Deprivation has no effect on Target Retention. Target Retention literally gives you 360 degrees of radar which is very useful in brawling, since when fighting someone using radar deprivation a simple torso twist will make you lose his targeting information.

Thanks for confirming this. I had noticed this after the patch, but thought I was going crazy. I was staring at my skill tree after the match to see if I had taken target retention by accident.

Bellum Dominum, on 21 June 2017 - 08:26 AM, said:

Trying to remember if I have an videos in any of my LRM boats to link but I really do think radar derp used to be instant loss. A hard counter to target decay. I rarely used radar derp myself so couldn't comment on that side of the situation.

I've always thought instant loss if you have target decay was terrribad. I remember well when they put that module in.. they added target decay just so LRMs could still be at least somewhat effective when LOS was lost and then turned around and negated the module they added. (There were TONS AND TONS of forum posts about this when they first added the modules *both of them*)

I guess if it's going to be an instant loss at least they named it correctly for that....

I can confirm what Jman is saying. Advanced radar deprivation before the skill tree did not kill the lock instantly once out of LOS if advanced target decay was equipped. You usually had a couple of seconds. That is enough time for your last volley that you fired as the mech was going out of LOS to hit. I used to love playing the HBK-4J before the LRM cooldown quirk reductions were put in. During a match, you could definitely, quickly notice the difference between the mechs that had deprivation and those that did not. Being able to make a mental note of that was often the difference between 90%lrm hit rates and 70%.

I hope they change this if it is unintentional. This combined with the increased prevalence of AMS and the improved AMS skills has meant even direct fire, close range, LRM use has taken a bit hit. Especially for mechs that only took 20-30 tubes. I find it disappointing as I think non-boaty LRM play should be promoted over the loaded down with LRM assaults(minus the AWS-8R).

[Weeny Machine]

Radar deprivation is totally ok. You have to invest a lot of points to get it in the first place. And then there is the "little" fact that LRMs completely negate the main skill factor in MWO: aiming. Sure, there are situations where your LRM suck and you cannot get a shot in because of the mechanic. Now guess what! When a target gets indirectly bombarded by you, he cannot retaliate either. I doubt you complain about that.

If you reduce RD, then you run the risk that the gameplay gets even more sit-in-one-place-Warrior Online than now. Well, if that is possible

Edited by Bush Hopper, 21 June 2017 - 11:54 AM.

[warner2]

It's very true that to get full radar deprivation you have to give up quite a lot... More and more I am forgoing sensors for firepower and armour (and sometimes taking AMS instead..). So the new system and the old system are not directly comparable. It would be hard to say radar deprivation is more powerful now because less people (I presume) have it and to take it you have to sacrifice skills elsewhere.

Are LRMs more or less popular after the skill tree patch?

[Deathlike]

warner2, on 21 June 2017 - 12:08 PM, said:

It's very true that to get full radar deprivation you have to give up quite a lot... More and more I am forgoing sensors for firepower and armour (and sometimes taking AMS instead..). So the new system and the old system are not directly comparable. It would be hard to say radar deprivation is more powerful now because less people (I presume) have it and to take it you have to sacrifice skills elsewhere.

Are LRMs more or less popular after the skill tree patch?

It was initially popular, but only because people hadn't adjusted. Now it's the same as we're already used to more or less.

[JC Daxion]

Bush Hopper, on 21 June 2017 - 11:53 AM, said:

Radar deprivation is totally ok. You have to invest a lot of points to get it in the first place. And then there is the "little" fact that LRMs completely negate the main skill factor in MWO: aiming. Sure, there are situations where your LRM suck and you cannot get a shot in because of the mechanic. Now guess what! When a target gets indirectly bombarded by you, he cannot retaliate either. I doubt you complain about that.

If you reduce RD, then you run the risk that the gameplay gets even more sit-in-one-place-Warrior Online than now. Well, if that is possible

Your post makes no sense.. Some how getting instantly off radar means you will move more? and If you stay on radar say .5 or 1 sec that makes you move less?

If you are saying people will just boat up LRM's more and not move, as others have said, Change the indirect fire mechanic. But it is funny how no one ever complains about snipers which more often than not are sitting farther back than LRM users but it's perfectly ok in turret warrior online.



the way it is now, the mechanic is broken.. I really need to make a video to show how people can just pop back and forth, and even stay in LOS, and break lock.. that cannot be working as intended. I have had this issue on Frozen city in the Dom circle area on the 5 line, down low, with that icy outcropping, and tourmaline in the dom circle area in the theta chute.. (though i don't recall if i was playing dom on both, Just the location.) Both times i could fully see the top of the mechs yet they were blipping in and out of lock

Edited by JC Daxion, 21 June 2017 - 12:25 PM.

[Jman5]

So yesterday Chris Lowrey, the balance guy, and Phil from NGNG were discussing balance on their stream and one of the topics that came up were LRMs. One point Chris brought up about LRM balance is that it's tough to balance them because they can be very effective at the low end and not so effective at the high end. So they were struggling to figure out how to better improve the weapon to not be useless at the high end.

Well Chris, I think one very good way to tackling this problem is addressing the very point of this post. Level 5 Radar Deprivation vs Level 5 Target Decay should leave a couple seconds of lock time to allow players to at least have a chance to connect. That way if a player:

1. Invests deep into the Sensor Class
2. Gets their own direct lock
3. Gets close enough

He at least has an opportunity to do a little damage to an opponent.

I know personally as someone who used to play LRMs a lot at all levels, the fact that I used to be able to get at least 1 volley of LRMs on an opponent with Radar Deprivation was the difference between a viable weapon and an unviable one.

Another point Chris brought up was that time is a big issue. Well Fortunately this problem can be addressed very simply by adjusting the values of a couple of skill nodes. Two options.

1. Remove 2 of the Radar Deprivation Skill nodes leaving it at a max of 60% radar deprivation. This means that a level 5 target decay gives you ~ 2.2 seconds of lock time if you get a direct lock.

2. Keep 5 skill nodes, but decrease each one to 12%. This brings you to 60% and 2.2 second max lock on time.

Personally I'm a fan of the first option because you could make it so it costs 9 SP for Max Radar Deprivation and 10 SP for max Target Decay. A good balance. Either way this is one easy fix for you guys to do that wont take up all your time and I don't think it will really hurt new players.

Edited by Jman5, 23 June 2017 - 07:24 AM.

[Wattila]

The weapon itself encourages a lazy play style where you sit behind your team and wait for locks. Getting your own locks should be rewarded (buff artemis?) while indirect fire should be further penalized (increased spread?) to keep LRM warriors from terrorizing lower tier matches.

With that out of the way, the Sensors tree needs work. It's essentially a 19-points-or-nothing affair that leaves no room for specialization unlike the other trees. I'd wager most builds skip sensors altogether as the opportunity cost is just too high.

60% radar derp would require making the tree more attractive in general. Thinking about it quickly, the tree should be roughly split in radar decay and radar derp sides with equivalent node values. Use TIG and sensor range as filler, and leave seismic as the prize at the bottom. Basically make it more efficient to get some radar derp now that it's worse.

[JC Daxion]

Jman5, on 23 June 2017 - 06:55 AM, said:

So yesterday Chris Lowrey, the balance guy, and Phil from NGNG were discussing balance on their stream and one of the topics that came up were LRMs. One point Chris brought up about LRM balance is that it's tough to balance them because they can be very effective at the low end and not so effective at the high end. So they were struggling to figure out how to better improve the weapon to not be useless at the high end.

Well the biggest issue with the OP at lower tiers is the LOS issue. Make it need the tools to fire indirect. That right there would make a huge different at lower levels, and get people to press W a bit more.


An LOS buff would not really hurt lower tiers, but would make um more effective at higher.

It might even encourage the whole Bring your own Tag theme as well. get people used to using LRMs properly.. aka in the 400-600 range where they are most effective.

LRMS are NOT the long range weapons people make um out to be..


As for Radar decay node adjustment, I think dropping a small %, as i said, i don't really have an issue with say 90%. That would still be a lot of points sunk to get there, but not cause this instant lock drop, even when you can still see the target because of invisible walls. It would be dropping 3 nodes down 56% if they went the 2% drop per node route.


Now if we can only figure out how to get snipers to move up sometimes.. that would be nice too

Edited by JC Daxion, 23 June 2017 - 08:24 AM.

[Obadiah333]

buy a bap or cap. equip a narc or tag. problem solved. If you get your own locks, there won't be an issue with decay.

[Jman5]

Obadiah333, on 23 June 2017 - 09:28 AM, said:

buy a bap or cap. equip a narc or tag. problem solved. If you get your own locks, there won't be an issue with decay.

1. BAP does not increase how long you can hold a lock. Nor does it increase the speed you can acquire a lock.

2. TAG does nothing to counter radar deprivation. You still lose lock instantly. It's useful for other purposes so I do use one, but not for this.

3. Telling everyone running LRMs to also be saddled with 4-5 ton NARC is frankly unreasonable. Besides NARC can be shot down by 1 AMS with the right skills/quirks and gets countered by ECM. We're going back to the idea of escalating counters, but NARC is way down the line.

4. Getting your own locks is the entire point of investing in Target Decay skills, but it's currently completely nullified by the newly buffed Radar Deprivation. That's what I'm trying to drive home in this thread.

If the only way you can hit a guy with radar deprivation is if he's under a UAV or NARC'd it should be pretty obvious that's a balance problem.

Edited by Jman5, 23 June 2017 - 11:27 AM.

[AzureRathalos]

Huh.

Just trying to work the math out in my head right now.

Before the 2017 Skill Tree System, it was like this:
Target Loss + Target Decay - Radar Derp

One added a set amount, the other subtracted a set amount. Also, the Decay and Derp amounts were fairly close, so they would counter each other leaving an amount of time close to Loss.

Now, the math is like this?
(Target Loss + Target Decay) - (Target Loss + Target Decay) * Radar Derp

Where Derp subtracts a % of the total Loss + Decay. This would lead to max Derp cutting off locks completely, regardless of Decay.

Edited by AzureRathalos, 23 June 2017 - 11:54 AM.

[Jman5]

AzureRathalos, on 23 June 2017 - 11:53 AM, said:

Huh.

Just trying to work the math out in my head right now.

Before the 2017 Skill Tree System, it was like this:
Target Loss + Target Decay - Radar Derp

One added a set amount, the other subtracted a set amount. Also, the Decay and Derp amounts were fairly close, so they would counter each other leaving an amount of time close to Loss.

Now, the math is like this?
(Target Loss + Target Decay) - (Target Loss + Target Decay) * Radar Derp

Where Derp subtracts a % of the total Loss + Decay. This would lead to max Derp cutting off locks completely, regardless of Decay.

It's hard to know for certain how it technically worked, but conceptually, you can think of it that way. Old target decay module left you with about 2-3 seconds on the lock length vs radar deprivation module. In practice, this usually meant that if you were pretty close, like 200-400 meters away, and you grabbed your own direct lock, you could land 1 shot before losing the lock. If you brought all the right gear for fast lock times, and you were quick enough, It was a viable alternative for dealing with those really good hill humping and jump sniping mechs that barely expose themselves.

Edited by Jman5, 23 June 2017 - 12:17 PM.