41 replies to this topic

[Snowbluff]

So I was playing around with my Grinner (bought with event MC and the sale) and I locked onto a guy you went for cover. I lost the lock, and five seconds later a bunch of LRMs crashed down into where he was.

So uh... that got me thinking. What if you buffed up your missile velocity with skill nodes? So I nearly spent my hard earned, hero spamming, Cbills on a maddog before I thought I should check with you guys to see what you think.

[FupDup]

Generic velocity nodes already do this, bruh.

[Tarl Cabot]

But it would not help if the LRM boat is 800+ meters to your 6..

Edited by Tarl Cabot, 01 February 2018 - 04:57 PM.

[El Bandito]

LRMs need velocity increase across the board in the first place. 200 m/s should be a good start.

[Snowbluff]

FupDup, on 01 February 2018 - 04:55 PM, said:

Generic velocity nodes already do this, bruh.

I know. What I mean is "has anyone maxed out velocity on their tree for missiles and what is it like?"

[El Bandito]

Snowbluff, on 01 February 2018 - 07:33 PM, said:

I know. What I mean is "has anyone maxed out velocity on their tree for missiles and what is it like?"

+15% on a crap velocity still means crap. Best I can say is that it is better than nothing.

Edited by El Bandito, 01 February 2018 - 07:55 PM.

[Khobai]

LRMs could certainly use a velocity buff but it still wont make them competitive weapons.


im convinced the only way to make LRMs competitive is to add destructible terrain

but only explosive weapons like missiles should be able to crater/deform terrain and blow up buildings though. not energy or ballistic weapons.

LRMs will never be a good weapon as long as people can just dodge behind invincible cover. but give them the ability to destroy said cover and it sets them apart from energy/ballistic weapons.

being able to destroy those stupid pebbles that your assault mechs always trip over would be satisfying too

Edited by Khobai, 01 February 2018 - 08:13 PM.

[Xmith]

Would you be ok with a longer cooldown?

When it comes to PGI's style of balancing, "you can't have your cake and eat it too".

[Snowbluff]

El Bandito, on 01 February 2018 - 07:54 PM, said:

+15% on a crap velocity still means crap. Best I can say is that it is better than nothing.

Ah okay. Thanks for the answer.

[El Bandito]

Xmith, on 01 February 2018 - 08:15 PM, said:

Would you be ok with a longer cooldown?

When it comes to PGI's style of balancing, "you can't have your cake and eat it too".

I am completely fine with PGI increasing LRM velocity and damage while nerfing its cooldown.

[justcallme A S H]

Snowbluff, on 01 February 2018 - 07:33 PM, said:

I know. What I mean is "has anyone maxed out velocity on their tree for missiles and what is it like?"

How about you math it out rather than listen to advice of people that, generally, have no idea what they are talking about?

That said on LRMs, it's a waste. Same as many nodes in the skill maze have little relevance or use in the game

[Brain Cancer]

As with all skill tree stuff, it's percentage based. This means 15% bonus to a low number is much less than the same to a higher one.

LRMs are the lowest of the low. 160 base velocity, so 15% is...24 more.

184 velocity. Woot. Note that LRMs were 175 at one point, but the extra 15 velocity was considered to be too dangerous and they were nerfed to 160.

Let me repeat that. LRMs, at 175, which is less than what they do now with the skill tree, was considered too fast. Because apparently, 15 velocity is massive. Not 150. Fifteen. For a weapon with a range of 800+ meters, supposedly.

ATMs? 200 + 15% = 230.

What really sad is that considering how abominable base velocity is, I'd suggest it anyway. You need every bit of help you can get.

Streaks are 230/250, so a fully beefed up ATM matches an unaugmented Clan Streak. Streaks get up to 264.5/287.5 velocity when buffed.

SRMs are 400 velocity, so that's 460 when boosted. MRMs, the speed demon of all damaging missiles are a base 475, and with the nodes, 546.

For comparison, NARC velocity is a base 500 (or 575 with boosts), meaning the "wow, that's hard to hit with at range" NARC has a base velocity more than twice that of a skilled up LRM, and about twice that of ATMs.

And all of these, each and every single one of these is slower projectiles than an unaugmented AC/20 (650 velocity). Never mind LB-20X. Those are well into the 4 digit range.

[Mystere]

El Bandito, on 01 February 2018 - 06:02 PM, said:

LRMs need velocity increase across the board in the first place. 200 m/s should be a good start.

I'd say go much higher, like 300. Then adjust other missile weapon speeds accordingly. Finally. also adjust AMS and LAMS accordingly.

And while we're at it, also give LRMs a steeper angle of descent.

But seriously, all missile types should be more than just viable alternatives to laser vomit at the formers' specific ranges of operation. And if people want to mitigate against their effectiveness, then they should be investing more in countermeasures rather than just loading up on more weapons and ammo.

Edited by Mystere, 01 February 2018 - 10:07 PM.

[Brain Cancer]

Mystere, on 01 February 2018 - 09:51 PM, said:

I'd say go much higher, like 300. Then adjust other missile weapon speeds accordingly.

And while we're at it, also give LRMs a steeper angle of descent.

But seriously, all missile types should be more than just viable alternatives to laser vomit at the formers' specific ranges of operation.

Much steeper on LRMs and they lurmageddon into head-crackers again.

Oh. and for some real-life comparisons- 1950's era antitank missiles hit about 150 m/s tops. BGM-71 TOWs get up to 278 m/s. Javelins are a bit slower at roughly 205 m/s. This actually puts MWO's guided missiles at roughly the same speed ranges- well, except the LRMs, poor things.

Your average modern tank gun hits at least 1500+ m/s.

[FupDup]

Brain Cancer, on 01 February 2018 - 10:16 PM, said:

Much steeper on LRMs and they lurmageddon into head-crackers again.

That's the exact thing that Mystere wants, though. He's the guy who supported the original implementation of the Long Tom for Pete's sake and wants artillery consumables to do way more damage than they had at their maximum peak...

[Mystere]

Brain Cancer, on 01 February 2018 - 10:16 PM, said:

Much steeper on LRMs and they lurmageddon into head-crackers again.

Precisely.

Brain Cancer, on 01 February 2018 - 10:16 PM, said:

Oh. and for some real-life comparisons- 1950's era antitank missiles hit about 150 m/s tops. BGM-71 TOWs get up to 278 m/s. Javelins are a bit slower at roughly 205 m/s. This actually puts MWO's guided missiles at roughly the same speed ranges- well, except the LRMs, poor things.

Your average modern tank gun hits at least 1500+ m/s.

Correction. The BGM-71 TOW apparently goes from 278-320 m/s and with a range of at least 3,750m (and up to 4,500m for some variants).

So a 300m/s 1000m LRM sounds fine with me.

FupDup, on 01 February 2018 - 10:18 PM, said:

That's the exact thing that Mystere wants, though. He's the guy who supported the original implementation of the Long Tom for Pete's sake and wants artillery consumables to do way more damage than they had at their maximum peak...

I dispute your assertions about me. I just want strikes to be at their original, head-cracking selves.

Edited by Mystere, 01 February 2018 - 10:33 PM.

[Xavori]

Mystere, on 01 February 2018 - 10:23 PM, said:

Precisely.



Correction. The BGM-71 TOW goes from 278-320 m/s, and with a range of 3,750m.

So a 300m/s LRM sounds fine with me.

I dispute your assertions about me. I just want strikes to be at their original, head-cracking selves.

I mean, wouldn't it be cool if there was more to the game than just laser vomit and hide behind buildings waiting on cooldowns?

[Mystere]

Xavori, on 01 February 2018 - 10:30 PM, said:

I mean, wouldn't it be cool if there was more to the game than just laser vomit and hide behind buildings waiting on cooldowns?

As Khobai said, let's also have destructible terrain.

And to that I'd also add that at least 25% of maps should be dense urban environments (and not the hillbilly towns we currently have masquerading as one).

Edited by Mystere, 01 February 2018 - 10:40 PM.

[El Bandito]

Mystere, on 01 February 2018 - 10:35 PM, said:

As Khobai said, let's also have destructible terrain.

And to that I'd also add that at least 25% of maps should be dense urban environments (and not the hillbilly towns we currently have masquerading as one).

Destructible terrain can potentially drastically lower FPS. This game is a resource hog as is.

[Vellron2005]

I have not personally invested very heavily into velocity nodes, but that's only cose' I usually go all-in on survival and invest in range, heat gen and missile slots..

But on the few mechs that do have velocity nodes, I did notice a good increase in missile velocity.. and it can be mega useful!

It's very useful in mid range when the enemy can't dodge your missiles quickly enough.. If you're lurming from 800 meters, it will not be a big help, but if you're raining from 600-400 meters, you will notice alot more missiles connecting..

Come to think of it.. I probably really should invest in velocity..