426 replies to this topic

[Kubernetes]

HammerMaster, on 16 February 2018 - 04:40 PM, said:

Hrmm.
FASA sandbagging? Say it isn't so.
Yes we always optimize.
My builds are usually what I've heard described as "superstock" flavor of the stock load out. Better.
But! Sounds to me like you don't like bracket builds.

Bracket builds are bad by their very nature. This is not a conspiracy by PGI and "the comp crowd." Look at the HMS Dreadnought: it dispensed with mixed weapons and went with all big guns, obsoleting every other capital ship overnight. When aircraft carriers were first developed many were conceived as crusier/carrier hybrids. Those designs were trashed because specialized cruisers and carriers outperformed any hybrid. Bracket builds give you a sense of tactical security because "Hey I can fire at every range." The problem is that you're ineffective (relatively) at every range.

[Y E O N N E]

The irony of the Dreadnought example is that evolution of that type of ship eventually ended up with a collection of big and small guns again. Like, the Iowa-class is essentially the pinnacle of that type of battleship, and she had a secondary 5-inch battery to complement the 9-inch main battery, to say nothing of the 12.7 mm, 20 mm, and 40 mm point defense weapons.

That said, the point is still valid for MWO. You either use weapons that synergize or you will be ineffective everywhere.

[HammerMaster]

Kubernetes, on 16 February 2018 - 06:35 PM, said:

Bracket builds are bad by their very nature. This is not a conspiracy by PGI and "the comp crowd." Look at the HMS Dreadnought: it dispensed with mixed weapons and went with all big guns, obsoleting every other capital ship overnight. When aircraft carriers were first developed many were conceived as crusier/carrier hybrids. Those designs were trashed because specialized cruisers and carriers outperformed any hybrid. Bracket builds give you a sense of tactical security because "Hey I can fire at every range." The problem is that you're ineffective (relatively) at every range.

Oh here we go. Meta be damned. I'll run it my way. Don't rain on my parade.

Edited by HammerMaster, 16 February 2018 - 06:52 PM.

[Brain Cancer]

MrMilkshake, on 16 February 2018 - 04:37 PM, said:

Brain, Why on earth would you want them to be anything more than what they currently are ? A crutch for new and unskilled players. A tool for those to use to let them feel some of the heat of the action from time to time. Lurms are a point and squirt wepon that takes no skill and is a cheesy way to die if your in higher tiers. I for one dont want them to be anything more than what they are right now.

Because no weapon should be simply a weak piece of junk because "muh newbies". Every weapon should be dangerous, and "it's only good enough to shoot trash players" is a dangerous excuse that can be applied further.

How about Streaks? How about ATMs? Why not just nerf those into the ground and we can just make sure people only stick SRMs in those missile hardpoint slots? (We just nerfed MRMs, as of 2/20 BTW- plenty of room to do it some more)

LRMs are spread weapon damage (and weak damage at that, that's why we see people firing 60-80 at a time) that takes multiple seconds to lock, fire, and hit. Right there, it's already inferior to hitscan or PPFLD that can be delivered to a single point immediately and in large amounts. It doesn't win trades. It's inaccurate. It's unfocused. It has multiple pieces of defensive equipment that directly mitigate it's damage or counter it's ability to be fired with any accuracy whatsoever, some of which aren't even usually used because who needs them, it's slow, ticklish lurms that only really get the comedy kills?

You don't want to die by LRM because at this point, LRMs are so humiliatingly bad to use that dying to them means you got goofed.

[Kubernetes]

HammerMaster, on 16 February 2018 - 06:51 PM, said:

Oh here we go. Meta be damned. I'll run it my way. Don't rain on my parade.

That's cool, no one is saying you can't.

[Burke IV]

Asym, on 16 February 2018 - 05:09 PM, said:

You are so confused....

Asym there is no point arguing now, they have won. Just remember that the LRM hating people wernt good enough to fight LRMs on a fair and level playing field. They cryed for nerfs endlessly and it wasnt until it got so bad you couldnt carry enough ammo there was finally no point trying anymore. They didnt beat the LRM players, they beat LRMs.

Edited by Burke IV, 17 February 2018 - 08:29 AM.

[Revis Volek]

mogs01gt, on 13 February 2018 - 12:57 PM, said:

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.

You have no idea what you are talking about, but keep on acting like ya do.

[Kroete]

Revis Volek, on 17 February 2018 - 08:34 AM, said:

You have no idea what you are talking about, but keep on acting like ya do.

Please explain why there so many posts on other topics say that you dont balance for bottom, but for the top and why lrms should be balacend by bottom and not top.
I dont understand that?

Edited by Kroete, 17 February 2018 - 08:43 AM.

[Revis Volek]

Kroete, on 17 February 2018 - 08:43 AM, said:

Please explain why there so many posts on other topics say that you dont balance for bottom, but for the top and why lrms should be balacend by bottom and not top.
I dont understand that?

wut?


Did you even read the post i quoted? He was referring to AMS not being taken.


I have no idea why people are saying that because i never said that. You dont balance ANYTHING from the bottom up thats cratering to the lowest common denominator and that is straight up wrong.

No one brings AMS if they know how to use cover. Hard Cover has no tonnage or slot cost, never runs out of ammo and is usually there the whole match. AMS is for people who actually WANT to shoot LRM's and ATM's down.

He saying TEAM PLAY in a TEAM PLAY GAME isnt valued. He just doesn't understand that no one gives a s&%t that he was the AMS wagons because no one needs it. See above as to why AMS wagons are a waste. So he decided to get all worked up and whine about NO ONE BRINGING AMS SO WE CAN STAND IN THE OPEN AND DIE LIKE MECHTARDS!

[Tordin]

Metus regem, on 14 February 2018 - 08:34 AM, said:

Sjorpha,

As I've said on many occasions, I love LRM boats on my team, they soften targets for me to kill, I also love LRM boats on the Red team, as they are easy kills. I really don't get the hate that people have for them, they have their uses, and when properly supported they are okay at T3/4/5 games... I'd just like to see them viable at higher ranked games....

The hatred against lurms come from those that CANT adapt. And or that pin point should be the ONLY way to do damage, even if its not neccesary the most skill based. Teh lurms have at least 4 counters. Cover, min range, ECM, brawling mechs.
Cant say other weapons have so many counters. Some ballistic have jam chance and direct line of sight blocked as counters, kinda.
Energy weapons have heat and line of sight blocked as counters, to some degree certain energy weapons like ppc and high heat lasers have foes closing in on them a good counter, since firing high heat weapons often in CQC is baaad.
The hate also might come from those that lovve to stroke their epeen way to much. For all they care there should be only 1 weapon, 1 type of mech ( the Metatinator), 1 map and 1 game mode. Thats their FUNWORLD!
Yaaaay! Your fun is wrong, begone could be their slogan.
But by sane people which loves varity ( include bracket and generalist builds too) its the epitome of borefest.

Also convergence should get shaken up, so pin-point is an exception to the rule unless that weapon gets help, by say targeting computers, line of sight or that the weapon is breed to be pin-point.
I think there was this Live public test a time ago for, what was it, laser lcok on? Yeah some scared skittles got shitscared of having lasers take such a new turn, they made sure PGI got scared, discouraged to so they dropped it. Cant have anything counter pin point you know, besides cluttered line of sight.

In general I think LURMS need a bit longer lock on, alot faster velocity, maybe more damage. The number in the designation LRM 10 means 10 missiles right, not just 10 dmg?? Got a brain- lock so I cant check right now.
Maybe make LRM 20 be about unleashing 20 missiles but do total 40 dmg, aka 2 dmg per missile, or maybe increase the spread a little more and make it 3 dmg per missile.

Oh yeah, just to put it out. the ATM missiles needs more missile health. The min range should stay I think. It might override the usefulness of SRMs and even streak srms.

Edited by Tordin, 17 February 2018 - 10:01 AM.

[OmniFail]

Revis Volek, on 17 February 2018 - 08:56 AM, said:

wut?


Did you even read the post i quoted? He was referring to AMS not being taken.


I have no idea why people are saying that because i never said that. You dont balance ANYTHING from the bottom up thats cratering to the lowest common denominator and that is straight up wrong.

No one brings AMS if they know how to use cover. Hard Cover has no tonnage or slot cost, never runs out of ammo and is usually there the whole match. AMS is for people who actually WANT to shoot LRM's and ATM's down.

He saying TEAM PLAY in a TEAM PLAY GAME isnt valued. He just doesn't understand that no one gives a s&%t that he was the AMS wagons because no one needs it. See above as to why AMS wagons are a waste. So he decided to get all worked up and whine about NO ONE BRINGING AMS SO WE CAN STAND IN THE OPEN AND DIE LIKE MECHTARDS!

LOL

God I wish this post was true. If it where true LRM 5s would not be extinct and LRM 10s would not be spit wads.

lol silly little post

[Revis Volek]

OmniFail, on 17 February 2018 - 02:41 PM, said:

LOL

God I wish this post was true. If it where true LRM 5s would not be extinct and LRM 10s would not be spit wads.

lol silly little post

and what are you talking about? reading comprehension fail?

When did i mention any specific LRM's? or even that any are better then others? I never even got into that you are really seeing something i didnt write it seems.

Edited by Revis Volek, 17 February 2018 - 02:55 PM.

[OmniFail]

Revis Volek, on 17 February 2018 - 02:54 PM, said:

and what are you talking about? reading comprehension fail?

When did i mention any specific LRM's? or even that any are better then others? I never even got into that you are really seeing something i didnt write it seems.

Whatever bro, there's plenty of AMS on the battlefield and it is the most solid of counters. You guys always act like there is some magic cover next to you.

[Revis Volek]

OmniFail, on 17 February 2018 - 03:29 PM, said:

Whatever bro, there's plenty of AMS on the battlefield and it is the most solid of counters. You guys always act like there is some magic cover next to you.

LOL

cover is all over the battlefield. I dont have a single mech out of 200+ with AMS.


Its worthless against every other weapon in the game except for LRM and ATM for the most part. Might get a few shots off on the occasional SSRM shot or something. Where as HARD COVER blocks all types of fire all the time. If you are not moving from cover to cover in this game you are straight up playing wrong.

As a 97% player you should be well aware of how to play the game correctly.

Edited by Revis Volek, 17 February 2018 - 03:36 PM.

[Asym]

Burke IV, on 17 February 2018 - 08:28 AM, said:

Asym there is no point arguing now, they have won. Just remember that the LRM hating people wernt good enough to fight LRMs on a fair and level playing field. They cryed for nerfs endlessly and it wasnt until it got so bad you couldnt carry enough ammo there was finally no point trying anymore. They didnt beat the LRM players, they beat LRMs.

Good point. It is why I and dozens of others don't play MWO actively anymore....only for events sadly. The way I figure it, there are 55 of us and only 6 are playing part-time and out whales still buy everything but there are only 3 of them....... PGI is losing no less than $3K every quarter....... What did Forrest say: "Can't fix stupid?" or was it "Stupid is as stupid does"???

[Andi Nagasia]

OmniFail, on 17 February 2018 - 03:29 PM, said:

Whatever bro, there's plenty of AMS on the battlefield and it is the most solid of counters. You guys always act like there is some magic cover next to you.

i dont see too much AMS, maybe 1-2 every other match,

for the most part LRMs are Great teachers,
they teach Tier 4-5 players that standing out in the open is a death sentence,
something that will help those players as they climb in the tiers,

cover is the most important defense,
Staying near cover will help you vs LRMs, but it will help you more so vs all other weapons,
for many top Tier players we see LRMs as a Training tool, it helps New players learn to use cover,
which in an FPS Mech Sim is invaluable, especially when you only have One Life,

[Khobai]

Quote

Bracket builds are bad by their very nature. This is not a conspiracy by PGI and "the comp crowd." Look at the HMS Dreadnought: it dispensed with mixed weapons and went with all big guns, obsoleting every other capital ship overnight. When aircraft carriers were first developed many were conceived as crusier/carrier hybrids. Those designs were trashed because specialized cruisers and carriers outperformed any hybrid. Bracket builds give you a sense of tactical security because "Hey I can fire at every range." The problem is that you're ineffective (relatively) at every range.

Except the carrier is the ultimate example of a bracket build thats effective at every range.

Planes on carriers could engage at every range. And they could engage virtually any enemy target: engage enemy aircraft with fighters, divebomb/torpedo enemy ships, spot for friendly ships, provide close air support for coastal invasions, etc...

Carriers had no real additional weaknesses over Battleships either. I mean they were both weak against submarines and needed escorts but the carrier a bit less so because it could spot subs on the surface more easily. carrier bracket builds won out in modern naval doctrine over the more specialized battleships.

Bracket builds work in real life. Not so much in MWO

But thats a good thing. MWO needs to have different playstyles to be fun. No single playstyle should be able to dominate every range bracket. And versatile weapons should always lose out to specialized weapons inside the specialized weapons preferred range.

Andi Nagasia, on 17 February 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

i dont see too much AMS, maybe 1-2 every other match,

yeah I dunno why LRMs have to be punished because people cant be bothered to take AMS.

Edited by Khobai, 17 February 2018 - 04:07 PM.

[MischiefSC]

If only we had discussed this before, repeatedly.

Flat trajectory, faster, tracking with lock.

With TAG/NARC can do indirect fire as it works currently.

No you don't get to make LRMs the focus of MWO which all other strats and builds need designed around. You don't get a locking, tracking indirect fire weapon that is as dangerous and effective as direct fire. If you don't get why then nobody can help you.

Fortunately I can not imagine PGI making a mistake of that scale so no worries.

[Khobai]

Quote

Flat trajectory, faster, tracking with lock.

With TAG/NARC can do indirect fire as it works currently.

thats terrible

LRMs still wouldnt be able to compete with direct fire weapons even with a velocity bump.

and on top of that you want to make indirect fire require 2 mechs to be able to pull off? without any guarantee that there will even be another mech with tag or narc on the same team?

if indirect fire required 2 mechs you would literally have to make it twice as powerful for it to be worth it.

why dont we make laser vomit require 2 mechs to use? one to fire the lasers and another to spray them down with coolant. would laser vomit still be good? nope. especially since theres no guarantee of having a firetruck coolant mech on your team to hose you down. and no, laser vomit doesnt require any real skill either.

Quote

You don't get a locking, tracking indirect fire weapon that is as dangerous and effective as direct fire

LRMs will never be as dangerous or effective as direct fire. Not even if you increased their velocity to 200m/s or even 240m/s.

No one is worried about LRMs ever being as good as direct fire weapons.

Its the indirect fire that people are worried about becoming too strong.

But at the same time you cant completely remove the indirect fire and require TAG/NARC to be able to use it. Because youre not guaranteed to get a TAG/NARC mech on your team. And also because it would still be way too weak to justify eating up 2 mech slots on your team compared to if you just had two mechs with direct fire weapons instead.

So this is my suggestion:
-increase cooldown on LRMs and dmg per missile so theyre less spammy and less toxic in general
-increase velocity on LRMs to 200-240 so theyre a bit better at longer range (and buff ams appropriately)
-weaken tracking/spread on indirect fire by 25%-50% but mechs can still indirect fire no problem
-buff TAG/NARC tracking/spread by the same amount as the above penalty

I dont believe those changes are gonna cause an LRMpocalypse.

Edited by Khobai, 17 February 2018 - 04:30 PM.

[YueFei]

They should let the player control the arc. Aim up/left/right and launch, manipulate tracking with reticule placement, etc.

Let's you do trickshots around obstacles and also focus the missile cluster on the hitbox you want (e.g., if reticule is not on enemy mech body part, it reverts to wider spread and current levels of tracking).

Unfortunately that most likely requires deeper changes in the game's engine, so it most likely will not happen in MWO.

Better luck for the next Mechwarrior title, I guess.