Jump to content

Lrms Are Balanced To The Skill Level Of T4-5 Players: But They Don't Take Into Account Zero-Skill Counters?


426 replies to this topic

#1 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,723 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 12:54 PM

Basically,on the last podcast for Paul, (https://soundcloud.c...164-paul-inouye) we had a little bit about LRMs.

Namely, we got told why they're deliberately bad. Balancing LRMs to be good enough for T1 would cause them to destroy T4-5 play, because these players aren't skilled enough to handle an improved LRM being shot at them.

To that, I ask the following question:

Since AMS is zero skill (it's automatic missile busting), why can't LRMs be better and simply make AMS an automatic part of Trial robot builds? It's undodgeable missile damage reduction, functions better in large numbers, and better LRMs will actually even encourage AMS use outside of the underhive levels of play. It's a no-skill-needed way to give those unskilled players a crutch to survive standing in the rain. We even deliberately put an AMS hardpoint on stock chassis 99.9% of the time in MWO, just so people can use them. Not that we do, there's precious little WORTH using them on.

For that matter, it'll even make LRM use more skill oriented, as while people might not dodge the rain, the missile boat will have to figure out how to get around all the umbrellas suddenly in use.

#2 mogs01gt

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • 4,288 posts
  • LocationOhio

Posted 13 February 2018 - 12:57 PM

AMS isnt taken because team play isnt valued in the current game setup. Kill or be kill is all that matters and winning is an after thought.

Plus,its a bit moronic to balance LRMs based on T4-T5 players when so many hard counters exist.

Edited by mogs01gt, 13 February 2018 - 12:58 PM.


#3 Metus regem

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sureshot
  • The Sureshot
  • 10,275 posts
  • LocationNAIS College of Military Science OCS courses

Posted 13 February 2018 - 01:00 PM

I'm on board with making bad weapons less bad or viable... the question becomes how to do it?

I've been in favor of faster flight times with better grouping for direct fire, while indirect fire retains the current flight speed and grouping... the catch is that the firing mode becomes a toggle. As it stands now, we do have toggle-able equipment in the form of AMS and ECM systems. AMS is either on or off, while an ECM system can be in jamming or counter mode, this stands to reason that LRM's could be made less bad to decent by being able to toggle the firing method.... I'd also tune the minimum range for direct mode down to about 100m, while indirect would retain the 120-180m dead zones.

#4 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 21,765 posts
  • LocationB̶r̶o̶w̶n̶ Gray Sea Naval Command

Posted 13 February 2018 - 01:30 PM

Slowing down the cooldown on LRMs but increasing the damage on LRMs would be a good start.

That would make LRMs less spammy and force you to time your volleys better.

AMS would also become slightly more effective simply because there would be less missiles in the air and each missile shot down would be worth more because of the higher damage per missile.

Edited by Khobai, 13 February 2018 - 01:33 PM.


#5 FireStoat

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Icon
  • The Icon
  • 878 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 01:35 PM

If I am in a mech armed with LRMs and I fire the missiles at a target that I personally have an LOS lock for, give the missiles a 25% or greater velocity the moment they leave the tubes and they keep that velocity for the length of their travel.

Edit - my math might be bad on the velocity bonus, but you get the idea. LRM's suddenly become more fun for a team to use because the person using them is rewarded in getting their own locks to be more deadly with them, and their team is rewarded and has more fun because the mech using them is actually getting into the fight faster.
Fun is a goal of the game, right?

Edited by FireStoat, 13 February 2018 - 01:37 PM.


#6 Grus

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • Bad Company
  • 2,156 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 02:15 PM

View PostKhobai, on 13 February 2018 - 01:30 PM, said:

Slowing down the cooldown on LRMs but increasing the damage on LRMs would be a good start.

That would make LRMs less spammy and force you to time your volleys better.

AMS would also become slightly more effective simply because there would be less missiles in the air and each missile shot down would be worth more because of the higher damage per missile.


With this change (damage increase) IS LRM would have a advantage over cLRM due to the duration required for cLRM to deal full damage. add to that there is a higher chance of not being able to do full damage with cLRM because of just moving to cover. So you might hit with the first few missiles before your target either moves to cover or you lose LOS. But same situation and you're coming under attack from IS LRM that first hit is all the missiles (5, 10,15,20 what ever launcher is used) no just the first bit of a cLRM stream.

This would lead back to cLRM5 spam for shorter duration of the "stream".

#7 Gas Guzzler

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 12,967 posts
  • LocationCalifornia Central Coast

Posted 13 February 2018 - 02:17 PM

View PostGrus, on 13 February 2018 - 02:15 PM, said:


With this change (damage increase) IS LRM would have a advantage over cLRM due to the duration required for cLRM to deal full damage. add to that there is a higher chance of not being able to do full damage with cLRM because of just moving to cover. So you might hit with the first few missiles before your target either moves to cover or you lose LOS. But same situation and you're coming under attack from IS LRM that first hit is all the missiles (5, 10,15,20 what ever launcher is used) no just the first bit of a cLRM stream.

This would lead back to cLRM5 spam for shorter duration of the "stream".


So a weapon system that is twice the weight will actually be better? *gasp* The horror!

#8 FupDup

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 23,891 posts
  • LocationThe Keeper of Memes

Posted 13 February 2018 - 02:26 PM

Anecdotally I can get decent results (not great, but I pull my weight) using a Vulture Prime or H with twin ALRM20 and some backup lasers. And yes, the missiles are the part of the loadout doing the bulk of the work. Of course the quirks are likely helping out here, but the point is that they're not completely dumpster-level (even in Tier 1) like pre-rework Flamers.

#9 Stinger554

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Hungry
  • The Hungry
  • 277 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 02:31 PM

View PostFupDup, on 13 February 2018 - 02:26 PM, said:

Vulture Prime


What's a Vulture Prime there isn't a mech with that name in the game. Posted Image



More serious note I firmly believe the only way to get LRMs the buffs they need to be effective in higher tiers of play is through some form of mechanic rework. IE no lock-ons without direct LOS unless the target is Narc'd/tagged.

#10 Knuckles OTool

    Member

  • PipPip
  • 37 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 03:00 PM

I think LRM's are actually fine as they are. They farm a lot of damage in the t3-t5 bracket and in the upper tiers they just arent used by many good pilots but, when they are, the good pilots do some work with them. I watched some of Protons stream yesterday as I was stuck away from the comp and bored and his dual H Gauss mauler was getting fairly wrecked by missiles by people he couldnt see and it forced him to be more defensive and then he ended up playing a supernova with 4xlrm 20's and did an 1800 dmg match.

Its not that they arent that workable when theyre used like they should be, theyre just boring to play and most of the top guys wont use them. Mwo favors a gameplay style and cover system that counters it easily. You are always better off focusing down torso or legs instead of the entire body.

Trying to make them work against high alpha poke and hide and peepcs play just doesnt work and thats why they suck so bad against skill on skill games. You arent hitting a summoner thats poptarting with one, you wont end a laser guass sniper with one in a one on one because you are still working his arm armor when he is finishing your core and you certainly arent ending a srm light with it unless he is sleeping.

Yeah they have a lot of counters but a lot of the weapons do but if you buff them to make them competitive theyd be broken as hell in every other situation. Polar brawls are fun until that supernova over the hill just out of eyesight kills half your team.

I hear how rocks can easily counter LRM's but a rock counters literally every weapon system in the game except for strikes. Cover is OP. Plus, you go around buffing the long range missile systems and we will be seeing less good brawl maps came up in qp. You cant have my mining colony!

Edited by Knuckles OTool, 13 February 2018 - 03:05 PM.


#11 Lykaon

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 3,453 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 03:18 PM

View PostGrus, on 13 February 2018 - 02:15 PM, said:


With this change (damage increase) IS LRM would have a advantage over cLRM due to the duration required for cLRM to deal full damage. add to that there is a higher chance of not being able to do full damage with cLRM because of just moving to cover. So you might hit with the first few missiles before your target either moves to cover or you lose LOS. But same situation and you're coming under attack from IS LRM that first hit is all the missiles (5, 10,15,20 what ever launcher is used) no just the first bit of a cLRM stream.

This would lead back to cLRM5 spam for shorter duration of the "stream".



So what? sounds like an adiquate trade off for being HALF THE WEIGHT!

#12 Throe

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Guide
  • The Guide
  • 802 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 03:19 PM

I think they should implement a 90% lock improvement for first person launched LRMs. Meaning an LRM user who can see his target directly, can fire his own LRMs at that target with a 90% faster initial lock time(it would be near instant). I think they should allow this lock to apply retroactively to missiles already launched too, although I can see this being a technical limitation rather than an issue of game balance(it simply may not be possible to retroactively apply the lock mechanism).

When the target leaves field of view, normal lock decay applies, and any target lock obtained by a team mate grants no additional advantage beyond what it already does. This would encourage LRM users to get some face time with the rest of us, without really changing anything else about the current weapon.

#13 Burke IV

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guardian
  • Guardian
  • 1,181 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 03:24 PM

They killed facetime LRMs tho. People didnt like it, shakes made them sad. Cause it forced people to back up. The old AMS gave people time to back up aswell but if they didnt eventually it got overhwelmed. I suspect some felt their assult mech shouldnt have to back up in that situation.

#14 Zigmund Freud

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 329 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 03:30 PM

Just mentioned it in community-made balance update thread. Pretty much what OP said: buff LRMs (velocity buff, spread reduction), but at the same time budd AMS damage and significantly reduce LRM missile health, thus making AMS way more efective against LRMs. and only a little bit effective against SRMs and ATMs.
This will buff LRMs in higher tiers, where people rarely field AMS at all, and will make AMS more valuable. And it will not buff LRMs in T4-5, since all trial mechs will have buffed easy to use missile counter - AMS, which is also more effective now.

#15 Jman5

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • The People
  • 4,399 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 03:34 PM

View PostBrain Cancer, on 13 February 2018 - 12:54 PM, said:

Basically,on the last podcast for Paul, (https://soundcloud.c...164-paul-inouye) we had a little bit about LRMs.

Namely, we got told why they're deliberately bad. Balancing LRMs to be good enough for T1 would cause them to destroy T4-5 play, because these players aren't skilled enough to handle an improved LRM being shot at them.

To that, I ask the following question:

Since AMS is zero skill (it's automatic missile busting), why can't LRMs be better and simply make AMS an automatic part of Trial robot builds? It's undodgeable missile damage reduction, functions better in large numbers, and better LRMs will actually even encourage AMS use outside of the underhive levels of play. It's a no-skill-needed way to give those unskilled players a crutch to survive standing in the rain. We even deliberately put an AMS hardpoint on stock chassis 99.9% of the time in MWO, just so people can use them. Not that we do, there's precious little WORTH using them on.

For that matter, it'll even make LRM use more skill oriented, as while people might not dodge the rain, the missile boat will have to figure out how to get around all the umbrellas suddenly in use.


AMS with half a ton of ammo should absolutely be a key addition to every trial mechs. When we were building them for PGI, I ranted and raved on this subject. Not only does it increase how long these new players live, but it gives them something useful to contribute to the team. Plus, they can't even skill for radar deprivation even if they wanted to. Unfortunately everyone wanted to make meta builds for the tier 5 beginners and so we wound up with lots builds that are too hot without coolshot/skills and no AMS for the players who need them the most.

I'm glad you bring this up again because it's a mistake worth fixing.

#16 tker 669

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 993 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 03:36 PM

Tier four or five be damned.

The weapon needs a major velocity boost.

Hitting terribads faster isn't going to make as much of a difference to someone who doesn't understand terrain and positioning. They would barely feel the buff.

#17 Zigmund Freud

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 329 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 03:43 PM

View PostThroe, on 13 February 2018 - 03:19 PM, said:

although I can see this being a technical limitation rather than an issue of game balance(it simply may not be possible to retroactively apply the lock mechanism


Not so sure, when you target somebody, launch missile, loose lock, but in some time regain lock again, you can see already mid air missiles rapidly change their path to follow the target.

But yea, what you said grate idea, also only it is accompanied by buff of beagle active probe, tag and narc. Like you reduce free locks by teammates, but increase the target info sharing role of those specific systems, that already exist for this sole purpose.

So LRMs would be way more effective weapon than they are now, BUT within line of sight OR with the help of specific "info warfare weapons". I would love this.

View PostJman5, on 13 February 2018 - 03:34 PM, said:

I'm glad you bring this up again because it's a mistake worth fixing.


And also takes like 20 minutes to fix. There's no excuse for not doing that.

Edited by Zigmund Freud, 13 February 2018 - 03:44 PM.


#18 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,723 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 04:43 PM

View PostZigmund Freud, on 13 February 2018 - 03:30 PM, said:

Just mentioned it in community-made balance update thread. Pretty much what OP said: buff LRMs (velocity buff, spread reduction), but at the same time budd AMS damage and significantly reduce LRM missile health, thus making AMS way more efective against LRMs. and only a little bit effective against SRMs and ATMs.
This will buff LRMs in higher tiers, where people rarely field AMS at all, and will make AMS more valuable. And it will not buff LRMs in T4-5, since all trial mechs will have buffed easy to use missile counter - AMS, which is also more effective now.


You don't even need to buff AMS further.

You just need to have AMS show up for the game at the bottom automatically. It's a player controlled "nerf LRM" system, a dozen of them in a game full of newbies would instantly drag the average trial lurmer downhill in a hurry with LRMs as they are now. Then, you actually give LRMs stats that don't make good players cringe.

The potato fields are protected by their AMS scarecrows, and LRMs become at least second-rate weapons, rather than something you win in spite of using in matches with skilled players.

Good luck on getting them to change missile health, though. I'm not even sure PGI is capable of such earth-shaking things. At least I know the stuff they nerfed can be changed, which is where I'd be interested in seeing improvements. Slowing ROF and increasing damage, velocity, and both normalizing and restoring some of the spread reduction lost thanks to the last Artemis nerf.

#19 Metus regem

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Sureshot
  • The Sureshot
  • 10,275 posts
  • LocationNAIS College of Military Science OCS courses

Posted 13 February 2018 - 04:43 PM

Jman5 you were not the only one ranting and raving about the use of meta builds in trial mechs rather than good basic training builds that offered a wide variety of weapon types....

#20 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,723 posts

Posted 13 February 2018 - 04:48 PM

View PostZigmund Freud, on 13 February 2018 - 03:43 PM, said:


Not so sure, when you target somebody, launch missile, loose lock, but in some time regain lock again, you can see already mid air missiles rapidly change their path to follow the target.


That's because PGI can't really do much to change that, as they don't really have much capacity to fundamentally alter guided missiles. ATMs will do it as well, it's just not as obvious (and they're both built on the same code with a few numbers changed).

Quote

But yea, what you said grate idea, also only it is accompanied by buff of beagle active probe, tag and narc. Like you reduce free locks by teammates, but increase the target info sharing role of those specific systems, that already exist for this sole purpose.


Lovely. So we'll "improve" LRMs by making team-mates carry equipment that may or may not be useful in any given game because, y'know, we can totally predict what our team in QP is bringing.

Meanwhile, the guy with the Gauss Rifle doesn't care what you bring, his guns don't care about anything but a target.

Extra equipment shouldn't be part of the baseline- it's a tonnage/space/sometimes heat penalty that would otherwise go towards other things and are situationally beneficial to boot. NARC + LRM should be better than average, not "this is a trash weapon BUT if I sacrifice another missile hardpoint and 4+ tons, I can make it OK!".





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users