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

#281 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,851 posts

Posted 18 February 2018 - 04:10 PM

View PostDeathlike, on 18 February 2018 - 03:58 PM, said:


Welcome to MWO.


Eh, I understand it's the status quo.

It's not right, however. And a spade should be called a spade.

#282 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 18 February 2018 - 04:39 PM

A lot on this has already been covered. How bad players would use buffed LRMs isn't relevant - how good players would (and have) is. That's what will shape the game experience for most people.

IDF (and god mode and whatever else) is fine in a SP game. It's not supposed to be balanced, it's supposed to ensure the player can always win but with a bit of challenge.

Irrelevant to a PvP team based game., which needs skill balanced - as in skill is the deciding factor.

I get that some skill is involved in using LRMs in the same way skill is involved in not walking out of bounds. Having accuracy, as in being able to effectively put shots on target, doesn't mean it's a twitch shooter like CoD. That's so disingenuous that it's not far from bald faces lying.

Top performing players would still destroy you with LRMs if you make the game all about IDF - which would happen (and has happened) if you buffed IDF LRMs. Only it would eliminate all other play from the game in the same way pre-hoverjet, PPC speed nerf, ghost heat Poptarting made everything else irrelevant. You either had Heavy Metal, Dragonslayer or something similar or you got chewed. That's a pretty ****** game and not one most want to play.

Make LRMs largely direct fire and buff them to compete in that space. Make them 600 MS, tight spread, whatever. Leave IDF as a dedicated teamwork function.



#283 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,851 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 12:05 AM

View PostMischiefSC, on 18 February 2018 - 04:39 PM, said:

A lot on this has already been covered. How bad players would use buffed LRMs isn't relevant - how good players would (and have) is. That's what will shape the game experience for most people.


*shrugs* Again, you tell me "we can't buff LRMs except into an inferior direct-fire weapon because THINK OF THE HORRIBLE THINGS THAT WOULD HAPPEN AND NOTHING COULD BE DONE!". And don't tell me they wouldn't be inferior. If it ain't hitscan or at least PPFLD, it's going to end up plunked down right next to Streaks.

And I say "Nobody uses AMS, and AMS becoming a standard piece of equipment would be a good thing, and LRMs should be balanced taking a field full of players spitting flak at them."

Has anyone here actually seen a game where such a thing happened outside of a bug-ridden lurmageddon where players were desperately trying to stave off screwed up missile coding to save their own necks? Missiles should make AMS worth picking. For a weapon that seems to be nerfed and has a zillion counters, the most specific of which barely gets used...LRMs really don't do all that much when they're unopposed.

They generally don't. This is a fundamental balancing error that needs fixing.

Quote

IDF (and god mode and whatever else) is fine in a SP game. It's not supposed to be balanced, it's supposed to ensure the player can always win but with a bit of challenge.


I cannot believe you just equated being able to fire in a ballistic arc with god mode. The guy with the LRMs still needs a spotter, which means SOMEONE has your number. Shoot them. Even these days, you can be that LRM guy and watch as your potential locks pop and drop because the guy giving you the red square is also a red square to the opponents, who logically attempt to turn him into a pile of scrap (or he gets out). And every guy hiding behind a hill waiting for that is one less distraction for a potential spotter, one less set of armor to spread hits to, and one less person actually shooting if all they're doing is waiting for someone else to hitch to their missile targeting.

Quote

Irrelevant to a PvP team based game., which needs skill balanced - as in skill is the deciding factor.

I get that some skill is involved in using LRMs in the same way skill is involved in not walking out of bounds. Having accuracy, as in being able to effectively put shots on target, doesn't mean it's a twitch shooter like CoD. That's so disingenuous that it's not far from bald faces lying.


LRMs don't even function at a median level of skill. They are balanced right now to be roughly equal to what Paul considers the worst players in the game, using no counters whatsoever. That is, they are balanced to only be modestly effective against people who could faceroll a keyboard and reasonably improve their gameplay, never mind an average player, much less a good one. You could noticeably improve LRMs at this point and they STILL wouldn't be average, even at their supposed unique role in the game as you can dump red smoke on your opponents for better effect and less tonnage.

Quote

Top performing players would still destroy you with LRMs if you make the game all about IDF - which would happen (and has happened) if you buffed IDF LRMs. Only it would eliminate all other play from the game in the same way pre-hoverjet, PPC speed nerf, ghost heat Poptarting made everything else irrelevant. You either had Heavy Metal, Dragonslayer or something similar or you got chewed. That's a pretty ****** game and not one most want to play.


This isn't about making the game about IDF. It's about making LRM strengths be balanced against what is put into the game to be it's counters. And if newbies can't use the usual counters- give them ones they can.

LRMs should not be balanced against unskilled potato pilots. LRMs should be balanced against unskilled pilots given LRM counters that require no pilot skill to function properly.

Quote

Make LRMs largely direct fire and buff them to compete in that space. Make them 600 MS, tight spread, whatever. Leave IDF as a dedicated teamwork function.


Making IDF into some kind of awkward, super-situational teamwork dance is basically saying the game should be straight up only a direct-fire shooter, where manly men fight with their powerful shields of hills and random invisible walls to see who can put all of their damage into one critical location the fastest. Except for the airstrikes. Those are apparently A-OK, even when they can backshot a target from the front. It costs spacebucks, after all.

#284 MischiefSC

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 16,697 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 12:29 AM

I've said a billion times in a billion threads, consumables are a horrible, horrible idea and should be killed with nuclear fire from orbit. Especially above and beyond all else air strikes and arty - in fact even though they're a huge, huge advantage (200+ free damage each every mech in FW) I refuse to take and use them because **** consumables in the neck.

Do you understand why poptarting was a thing? Maximum damage with minimum exposure. That recipe is absolutely and exactly the crux of the issue. It's why poptarting got JJs and pretty much all PPFLD nerfed into the ground. If IDF is able to compete with direct fire it makes direct fire flat out inferior. In the same way that when poptarting wasn't absolutely inferior in all ways to direct fire options (brawling, sniping et al) it make all other methods of fighting inferior.

What people seem to be intentionally not getting is that good players don't hate LRMs because LRMs somehow make them not as good - they're always going to be good. Emp with an LRM deck is still going to utterly, completely and consistently destroy you in your LRM deck every single match every day all day. The problem is that good players recognize that it would wipe everything else out of the game. Every match would be built around either deploying, supporting or countering LRMs because they are the best way to do damage with the least exposure and that would be an absolute **** game in the same way the poptart meta dominance was a **** game.

There's some people who want the poptart meta back the way it was. They deserve tarred with the same brush buffing LRMs gets tarred with. These are concepts based around destroying all other gameplay to suit a tiny handful of peoples preferred gameplay.

IDF is a **** mechanic specifically because it's broken. It's the ability to damage/kill someone who can not shoot back. The necessity of focus on direct fire isn't some irrational hatred of IDF; it's the recognition that direct fire is inherently something you can balance; if I can shoot you then you can shoot me. I have to expose myself to damage to do damage. It's why you'll see really good players and people with great command of the games mechanics fighting tooth and claw over 20-50m of weapon range and considering it a fundamental balance leg as critical as damage and heat. To try and put IDF on the same footing then the game fundamentally changes; it becomes about 'how to stay hidden and still shoot'. It becomes a bug hunt and based entirely around the IDF mechanic.

Which would be absolute and utter **** for the great majority of players. If you want that then create private matches where everyone has to take LRMs or spotters. See if you can consistently even get 24 people to play that game and that game alone with all their MWO playtime. Which is why the idea is bad and even PGI recognizes it's terrible and won't ever happen.

Edited by MischiefSC, 19 February 2018 - 12:31 AM.


#285 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:28 AM

Quote

IDF is a **** mechanic specifically because it's broken. It's the ability to damage/kill someone who can not shoot back.


uh thats not at all how IDF works. someone has to spot for you. the person spotting for LRMs can be shot at.

the only exceptions to that are UAVs which can be shot down easily and NARC which still requires a spotter to expose themselves to attach it to enemies.

IDF doesnt magically let you target enemies without anyone on your team having LoS. someone on your team still has to assume the risk of spotting for the LRMs. LRMs arnt fire and forget either so that spotter has to keep spotting the whole time until the LRMs land.

Edited by Khobai, 19 February 2018 - 01:33 AM.


#286 Vellron2005

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood-Eye
  • The Blood-Eye
  • 5,443 posts
  • LocationIn the mechbay, telling the techs to put extra LRM ammo on.

Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:42 AM

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.


I think that ALL WEAPONS, including LRMs should be balanced on the average T3 player.

LRMs have so many counters, and are so nerfed that people actually already need a certain degree of skill to make them effective.

Putting more AMS on the battlefield has already happened with the advent of LAMS, and the skill tree buffs made them more effective, and we LRM boaters were forced to turn to the absurd - huge tube counts available only on Assaults and certain Heavies. As a result, less armor is at the front, more LRMs are in the air than ever, and people are yet again crying over LRM boat assaults..

This goes around in circles.. So now we're pushing LRM 80 - LRM 90, and 4xAMS builds coming as default. Powercreep much?

Making LRMs better and dangerous even to T1 players would not break low tier play.. It's the same as saying large laservomit alphas break low tier play.. it's absurd.

The fact of the matter is PGI Devs simply don't like to get LRMed, and are obviously keeping LRMs in the discard pile to make the paying Gauss/PPC tryhards happy.

it's like 3rd Person view all over again..

#287 HammerMaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 2,516 posts
  • LocationNew Hampshire, USA

Posted 19 February 2018 - 05:39 AM

View PostVellron2005, on 19 February 2018 - 01:42 AM, said:


I think that ALL WEAPONS, including LRMs should be balanced on the average T3 player.

LRMs have so many counters, and are so nerfed that people actually already need a certain degree of skill to make them effective.

Putting more AMS on the battlefield has already happened with the advent of LAMS, and the skill tree buffs made them more effective, and we LRM boaters were forced to turn to the absurd - huge tube counts available only on Assaults and certain Heavies. As a result, less armor is at the front, more LRMs are in the air than ever, and people are yet again crying over LRM boat assaults..

This goes around in circles.. So now we're pushing LRM 80 - LRM 90, and 4xAMS builds coming as default. Powercreep much?

Making LRMs better and dangerous even to T1 players would not break low tier play.. It's the same as saying large laservomit alphas break low tier play.. it's absurd.

The fact of the matter is PGI Devs simply don't like to get LRMed, and are obviously keeping LRMs in the discard pile to make the paying Gauss/PPC tryhards happy.

it's like 3rd Person view all over again..


Paul Bowling. No knockdowns.
Paul LRMageddon. Under performing LRM.
Is that what your saying?

#288 Burke IV

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Guardian
  • Guardian
  • 1,230 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 06:53 AM

Even if they wont buff LRMs, a little more ammo wouldnt hurt would it? I mean if you force LRMers to fire patheric little shots at least compensate by letting them do it often. It doesnt really matter how weak LRMs get somebody will find a way to use them. The only way to stop that is to do what they have done... ammo starve the weapon. Its just plain bad workmanship.

#289 Yondu Udonta

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • CS 2020 Gold Champ
  • 645 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 07:06 AM

Woah hold up here, people actually want a cancer weapon like LRMs to be buffed such that more people will find it more viable? Goddammit everytime I poke out my head and hear WARNING INCOMING MISSILES I feel like getting up to the faces of the lurm boats and smashing them in the face.

LRMs are rightfully where they should be now, a weapon that barely allows you to target a specific component of a mech to compensate for the lack of skill required to use it: simply pointing it at a square and firing across terrain, hurting your enemy without them being in your line of sight.

Honestly, maybe just gitgud and use some direct fire weapon that requires skill lmao.

#290 Rusharn

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 224 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 08:44 AM

Add reactive and reflective armors to the game, and I think LRM's will have a better place in the game as I think a lot of people would mount reflective armor thus making the other weapons including LRM's more attractive. I would like the spread of LRM's to be tighter when you are using direct fire with Artemis improving this further, but keep the same speed, to encourage LRM pilots to stay closer to the front lines.

#291 HammerMaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Benefactor
  • The Benefactor
  • 2,516 posts
  • LocationNew Hampshire, USA

Posted 19 February 2018 - 11:39 AM

View PostYondu the Ravager, on 19 February 2018 - 07:06 AM, said:

Woah hold up here, people actually want a cancer weapon like LRMs to be buffed such that more people will find it more viable? Goddammit everytime I poke out my head and hear WARNING INCOMING MISSILES I feel like getting up to the faces of the lurm boats and smashing them in the face.

LRMs are rightfully where they should be now, a weapon that barely allows you to target a specific component of a mech to compensate for the lack of skill required to use it: simply pointing it at a square and firing across terrain, hurting your enemy without them being in your line of sight.

Honestly, maybe just gitgud and use some direct fire weapon that requires skill lmao.


Why so mad?

#292 OmniFail

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 438 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 12:11 PM

O wow man, we're doing this now!

Posted Image

Am I the most prolific LRM boater in existence at this time?

Edited by OmniFail, 19 February 2018 - 12:37 PM.


#293 OmniFail

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 438 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 01:13 PM

View PostYondu the Ravager, on 19 February 2018 - 07:06 AM, said:

Woah hold up here, people actually want a cancer weapon like LRMs to be buffed such that more people will find it more viable? Goddammit everytime I poke out my head and hear WARNING INCOMING MISSILES I feel like getting up to the faces of the lurm boats and smashing them in the face.

LRMs are rightfully where they should be now, a weapon that barely allows you to target a specific component of a mech to compensate for the lack of skill required to use it: simply pointing it at a square and firing across terrain, hurting your enemy without them being in your line of sight.

Honestly, maybe just gitgud and use some direct fire weapon that requires skill lmao.


Your tag sums up your view point.

Posted Image

You are the poster child for this whole mess. The reason LRM's are almost useless is because of people like you.

No... no... sir. You gitgud so the rest of us can get down the road to glory.

Edited by OmniFail, 19 February 2018 - 01:25 PM.


#294 Brain Cancer

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The 1 Percent
  • 3,851 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 04:37 PM

View PostHammerMaster, on 19 February 2018 - 05:39 AM, said:


Paul Bowling. No knockdowns.
Paul LRMageddon. Under performing LRM.
Is that what your saying?


There's a disturbing correlation between Things That Kill Paul Easily and Things Paul Breaks For "Game Balance".

I've said it before: Balance is determined by someone who's skill level is barely past newbie levels, despite having had game time since closed beta. This is not at all effective or good for the game.

View PostYondu the Ravager, on 19 February 2018 - 07:06 AM, said:

Honestly, maybe just gitgud and use some direct fire weapon that requires skill lmao.


Says the guy posting from an account with so few matches as to have nothing on Jarl's list or the leaderboards. I'm not even mad, just disappointed that the only attempt at trolling is a forum sockpuppet.

Posted Image

Son, I am disappoint.

#295 InvictusLee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The God
  • The God
  • 1,693 posts
  • LocationStanding atop my MKII's missile pack, having a whisky and a cigar.

Posted 19 February 2018 - 07:15 PM

View PostOmniFail, on 19 February 2018 - 12:11 PM, said:

O wow man, we're doing this now!

Posted Image

Am I the most prolific LRM boater in existence at this time?
im actually interested to see if u can give you a run for your money.

#296 Fleeb the Mad

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Urban Commando
  • Urban Commando
  • 441 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 08:16 PM

View PostOmniFail, on 19 February 2018 - 01:13 PM, said:


Your tag sums up your view point.

Posted Image

You are the poster child for this whole mess. The reason LRM's are almost useless is because of people like you.

No... no... sir. You gitgud so the rest of us can get down the road to glory.


Uh, what?

You need people to 'gitgud' so a weapon with a literal auto-aim feature can be buffed to be more effective in an environment where more people know how to shoot?

No. LRMs are most common in the lower tiers because they're the easiest weapon to use. The mechanics that make them easy to use also give them a low skill ceiling. A low skill ceiling means they don't improve as a player gets better beyond a certain point. Ergo they're effective in lower tiers and garbage in high tiers.

Nobody who actually wants people to improve would make the case that LRMs need to be buffed because their targets suck. The reason LRM spam exists in the lower tiers is the guy who pulls the trigger doing better with those than with guns for the same level of effort.

LRMs actually need to become more complicated and difficult to use. A higher skill ceiling means they can be made more lethal without having to worry about wrecking balance in one of the tiers. That's the only way.

#297 Novakaine

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Veteran Founder
  • Veteran Founder
  • 5,694 posts
  • LocationThe Republic of Texas

Posted 19 February 2018 - 09:10 PM

Yeah sock puppets are about the some of it.

#298 OmniFail

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Big Daddy
  • Big Daddy
  • 438 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 09:12 PM

But bro,

If they where more complicated meh noobs wouldn't be able to use them. They can't even be bothered take the no skill hard counters.

#299 Yosharian

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 1,656 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 09:26 PM

I'll say the same thing I said 3 years ago: improve the way LRM weapon systems perform at short-to-medium range, and you'll make it a more satisfying and more skill-based weapon system.

- LRMs at short range (under 300m): speed increased to 300, up from 160

- LRMs at medium range (300-500m): speed increased to 210, up from 160

- LRMs at long range (500m+): speed reduced slightly to 120, down from 160

- LRM ammo count improved to 200/ton, up from 180/ton

- LRM20: heat reduced to 5, down from 6

- LRM short-range penalty removed across the board

- When fired without locks, LRMs behave like SRMs

- TAG laser is completely invisible to the enemy

- Fire and forget: once an LRM missile is fired, moving your reticle away from the enemy mech does not cause the missile to lose tracking (tracking is still lost as normal if the target is hidden from you or the spotter)

If these changes were implemented LRMs would actually be fun to use at shorter ranges, allowing them to be dumbfired in CQC against attackers, and allowing torso twist during cooldown periods.

Also get rid of the absurd missile stream mechanic on Clan LRMs.

#300 Khobai

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Elite Founder
  • Elite Founder
  • 23,969 posts

Posted 19 February 2018 - 09:50 PM

Quote

I'll say the same thing I said 3 years ago: improve the way LRM weapon systems perform at short-to-medium range, and you'll make it a more satisfying and more skill-based weapon system.

- LRMs at short range (under 300m): speed increased to 300, up from 160

- LRMs at medium range (300-500m): speed increased to 210, up from 160

- LRMs at long range (500m+): speed reduced slightly to 120, down from 160



LRM stands for LONG RANGE MISSILES

Youve got it completely backwards

the velocity should start slower then accelerate gradually upto top speed

Making it more difficult for LRMs to hit things at long range does not make them into functional LRMs.

Edited by Khobai, 19 February 2018 - 09:52 PM.






1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users