61 replies to this topic

[Mechwarrior9194373]

please change the minimum to at least 120m, the velocity of the missiles is already slow and the only way to connect an LRM is at medium range

[Novakaine]

Sad, but good luck with this one.
Wouldn't want the under-hive to explode.
PGI has stated their more than happy with under performing LRM's.
So my wallet is now under performing.

[MadHornet]

If you want a well-performing LRM mech, I would suggest doing a mobile medium 'mech. You can maintain mid-range positions with your speed or jumpjets and still deliver a good volley of missiles. Many medium 'mechs also have absurd missile quirks you can take advantage of, so they can do just as much damage as heavier LRM boats.

[Brain Cancer]

Barrack Hussein Ohmama, on 24 March 2018 - 06:33 PM, said:

please change the minimum to at least 120m, the velocity of the missiles is already slow and the only way to connect an LRM is at medium range

How about we simply remove the deadzones entirely?

Minrange in tabletop doesn't magically delete your shot because it hit one meter too close, it only makes a weapon effectively less accurate as in gets closer. And it's not only for certain weapons PGI decided to give it to- because a lot of ballistic weapons should get the same issue, but don't.

Replace them with some level of damage reduction roughly equal to the loss of accuracy. For an IS LRM, that's about 75% at point-blank (as it's got an obscenely long minrange) which would scale as you got closer to 180m towards 0% reduction. For a comparison, IS PPCs would lose about 33% damage at point-blank rather than zeroing out like they do now.

Weapons that magically become useless are Not Fun Weapons.

[Lykaon]

MadHornet, on 24 March 2018 - 09:06 PM, said:

If you want a well-performing LRM mech, I would suggest doing a mobile medium 'mech. You can maintain mid-range positions with your speed or jumpjets and still deliver a good volley of missiles. Many medium 'mechs also have absurd missile quirks you can take advantage of, so they can do just as much damage as heavier LRM boats.

As long as the opfor has no AMS. The problem is once the proper counters are in use LRMs are even worse off than simply being aweful.

I used to use a Cougar with 2 Hvy mediums, 2 LRM15s TAG and ECM as my LRM support chassis. Figured it was pretty much an equal to a Catapult in offense and defense may be even better due to ECM and low profile.

Stopped using LRMs entirely now because all it take is a map selection a game mode or 2 AMS on the enemy team and your mech becomes next to worthless.

[Alexander of Macedon]

Let's be honest, not that many people in QP actually run AMS, and ever since the nerf ECM isn't nearly as pervasive as it used to be.

The complaint about map selection ruining your build is really, genuinely funny though. Guess you're getting a taste of how it feels to get forced into Polar Highlands with a splat build assault?

[Burke IV]

Its not just AMS tho, anything below assult class is going to be suffering for ammo cause of whatever PGI did. Add to that gimped LRM5s. I dont think "underhive" got anything to do with it, somebody got beat a little too hard.

New BT game in april anyway, also in april...

[Novakaine]

Yeah Burke probably my fault

[IllCaesar]

I wouldn't mind them changing the minimum to 180m, if only to just be consistent in that the minimum range is 20% of the maximum range. Would definitely help to encourage more intelligent LRM play too, which is playing in the 250m-500m range. Smaller arcs mean less travel time which means less AMS effectiveness, not to mention that you're more likely to hit the components that you intend to due to not giving them the time to twist.

[Brain Cancer]

Alexander of Macedon, on 25 March 2018 - 05:04 AM, said:

Let's be honest, not that many people in QP actually run AMS, and ever since the nerf ECM isn't nearly as pervasive as it used to be.

The complaint about map selection ruining your build is really, genuinely funny though. Guess you're getting a taste of how it feels to get forced into Polar Highlands with a splat build assault?

This is because people tend to not use something that produces poor results (if your enemy is using the good stuff, there's not much AMS stops other than ATMs), and LRMs have gotten just plain curbstomped in terms of results.

ECM gets less use because of the skill nodes needed to actually make it function, versus pre-skilltree Cloak of Skill. Plus again, fewer effective weapons it counters.

[Lykaon]

Alexander of Macedon, on 25 March 2018 - 05:04 AM, said:

Let's be honest, not that many people in QP actually run AMS, and ever since the nerf ECM isn't nearly as pervasive as it used to be.

The complaint about map selection ruining your build is really, genuinely funny though. Guess you're getting a taste of how it feels to get forced into Polar Highlands with a splat build assault?

yeah because densely covered maps like...

HPG
Mining Collective
Canyon network
River City
Crimson Straight
Viridian Bog
Rubellite Oasis

That pretty much shut LRMs down if you have a pair of brain cells

And adiquately covered maps like...

Forest colony
Grim Plexus
Frozen City
Caustic Valley
Terra Therma
Tourmaline Desert

That a reasonable seasoned player can nullify any LRM threat on.

certainly make up for playing Polar Highland once for every 10 matches played on HPG.

Oh that is unless the match on Polar is an Escort (free un counterable ECM towers screwing locks) or Incursion (global activated uncounterable ECM available to screw locks)

So...maybe one in a dozen matches a player may need to have more than a basic understanding of MWo to not get Lurmed on Polar the other 11 matches though? all you need is enough focus to not spend the match chewing on the edge of your keyboard to evade LRMs.


So yeah...it's a valid concern due to the frequency of polar vs HPG or Mining or Canyon or frozen city etc...


Also, I primarily pilot close range brawlers these days and will gladly take a match on Polar over yet another HPG ( my second least liked map) or Viridian (my least liked map). Polar has some excellent cover to move through and get up close. Really the only serious threat from LRMs is if NARC is in play and your team lacks the good sense to utilize ECM or blitz the NARCer with lights and/or blitz the Lurmboat.

Edited by Lykaon, 26 March 2018 - 12:04 AM.

[Vellron2005]

What they need to do for LRMs is return the lock-on arc to 45%, thus enabling LRM bending, make it so Artemis applies to lock-ons without LOS (so more people will use it thus making builds different and tube counts smaller but more effective), and lower spread somewhat.

Also, return LRM range to it's base 1000 meters, cose' having it neutered to 900 meters and then having to use skills to get those important 100 meters back, while allowing ATMs a 1100 base range is absurd!

[Abisha]

If LRM was only this good...

https://youtu.be/L8eRzOYhLuw?t=1m51s

[Krivvan]

Vellron2005, on 26 March 2018 - 12:31 AM, said:

while allowing ATMs a 1100 base range is absurd!

The range of ATMs is misleading though. They're only truly useful damage-wise from 120m to 270m. At 1100m they can quite literally just get ignored due to how little damage they do.

[Nema Nabojiv]

Krivvan, on 26 March 2018 - 08:33 AM, said:

The range of ATMs is misleading though. They're only truly useful damage-wise from 120m to 270m. At 1100m they can quite literally just get ignored due to how little damage they do.

I find 2 dmg bracket useful tho. If there is no better targets and you have enough ammo.

Coincidentally, 500 meters is the exact range at which one can hope to score reliable hits with lurms, which makes them compete with ATMs and lose it due to longer minrange and no 3 dmg bracket.

I personally would like them to be true long range weapon, and for that they must not lose guidance mid-flight. Like, ever. If they launched they must hit regardless of locks, and LoS, and radar derp.
No minrange will work too, don't even know which would be more fun to use.

[Brain Cancer]

Vellron2005, on 26 March 2018 - 12:31 AM, said:

Also, return LRM range to it's base 1000 meters, cose' having it neutered to 900 meters and then having to use skills to get those important 100 meters back, while allowing ATMs a 1100 base range is absurd!

You shouldn't be firing LRMs at 900m anyway, given the horrid velocity and hence lack of accuracy. ATMs generally stuff themselves with range node skills to get better damage anyway. Both really don't do the whole hail-mary thing well outside of Polar and really should be firing inside 600m...well within their current max ranges.

[Variant1]

nein! as long as lrm have that indirect fire there shall be no love!
but in seriousness, as long as it has indirect fire capabilities min range is a good limiter. To accommodate for min range i suggest you stick with teamates or have back up weapons in case they get close. The best thing to do is both preferably sticking with your team, the indirect is really handy when youve helped a squad deal with an enemy and are moving to reinforce another position lobing missiles and giving pressure to the enemy.

[Brain Cancer]

Variant1, on 26 March 2018 - 02:04 PM, said:

nein! as long as lrm have that indirect fire there shall be no love!
but in seriousness, as long as it has indirect fire capabilities min range is a good limiter. To accommodate for min range i suggest you stick with teamates or have back up weapons in case they get close. The best thing to do is both preferably sticking with your team, the indirect is really handy when youve helped a squad deal with an enemy and are moving to reinforce another position lobing missiles and giving pressure to the enemy.

No, deadzones are a fun limiter.

There's absolutely nothing like being at point blank range with your main guns and having nothing happening. It's a garbage mechanic that punishes you for taking the weapon with dozens of tons of nothing while your opponent chews you to bits, often with a weapon that actually outperforms you at range, too.

It's even more ironic when they're using things like heavy gauss rifles that canonically have a 120m minimum range themselves. That PGI just said "Meh, we won't bother with minimum range on ballistics even though it's there, PPCs and ATM/LRMs only!"

Either give the same fair shake to all weapons with minimum range, or none of them. Damage reduction that gets potentially worse with larger minrange zones and as you get closer, IMHO would work just fine.

[Variant1]

Brain Cancer, on 26 March 2018 - 02:29 PM, said:

No, deadzones are a fun limiter.

There's absolutely nothing like being at point blank range with your main guns and having nothing happening. It's a garbage mechanic that punishes you for taking the weapon with dozens of tons of nothing while your opponent chews you to bits, often with a weapon that actually outperforms you at range, too.

It's even more ironic when they're using things like heavy gauss rifles that canonically have a 120m minimum range themselves. That PGI just said "Meh, we won't bother with minimum range on ballistics even though it's there, PPCs and ATM/LRMs only!"

Either give the same fair shake to all weapons with minimum range, or none of them. Damage reduction that gets potentially worse with larger minrange zones and as you get closer, IMHO would work just fine.

so is getting slammed in the face by waves of missiles from over terrain or staying behind cover for 5 minutes unable to do anything .

Its a mechanic used to punish you for boating and not sticking with your team. Each weapon performs a certain role differently then the rest. Lrms arent stronger but they perform their own specified role(softening targest from range or assisting the team by supporting them)

I will agree with you about heavy guass rifles. Perhaps a min range would curb its great strength but it does weigh alot with not alot of ammo per ton though.

If lrms were direct fire i would gladly have them take away the min range for lrms heck maybe give soem other bonuses to compensate for no longer having indirect fire. but thats just my take on them. im sure pgi has their reasons

[Brain Cancer]

Variant1, on 26 March 2018 - 02:56 PM, said:

so is getting slammed in the face by waves of missiles from over terrain or staying behind cover for 5 minutes unable to do anything .

Its a mechanic used to punish you for boating and not sticking with your team. Each weapon performs a certain role differently then the rest. Lrms arent stronger but they perform their own specified role(softening targest from range or assisting the team by supporting them)

Strangely, boating lasers or autocannons isn't punished in this fashion. For that matter, boating in general is only "punished" when it's supposedly breaking the game. We call that ghost heat. LRMs get that on top of minimum range. Oh, and it punishes PPC boats too. You know, like the Awesome! Can't have OP PPCs. LRMs are trash weapons as it is, but being able to hug someone to death (regardless of, you know the weapons actually functioning that way) with impunity is kinda sad.

As for softening someone from range? Try shooting them with a decent direct fire weapon, which actually are more accurate, more efficient, and will burn holes where you want them in the target, not sprinkle damage across it.

Quote

I will agree with you about heavy guass rifles. Perhaps a min range would curb its great strength but it does weigh alot with not alot of ammo per ton though.

You really don't realize how much ammo it takes to kill something with LRMs, do you? I mean, Literally, you can throw tons of ammo at a target and not even destroy a section or even a weapon, because it's that sandblasty. Oh, and did you know every Gauss weapon in the game is supposed to have a minimum range, along with half of the autocannons?. Really. Go check em on Sarna. You'll see what I mean. Minimum range is arbitrary in MWO and a punishment, not merely a drawback.

"It does less damage up close" is a drawback. "You are useless if someone gets a meter too close" is a punishment.

Quote

If lrms were direct fire i would gladly have them take away the min range for lrms heck maybe give soem other bonuses to compensate for no longer having indirect fire. but thats just my take on them. im sure pgi has their reasons

Know what else has a deadzone? ATMs, which are....direct-fire guided missiles like LRMs, only no indirect mode and reward closer shots with better damage. Just 120m of does nothing instead of 180 like the vastly inferior IS LRM gets.