29 replies to this topic

[FupDup]

Lurms are tricky to buff because their problems mostly stem from flawed mechanics rather than XML number values. They pretty much have to be kept weak in the XML number sense because otherwise their mechanics would create another Lurmageddon episode (Lurms ruling the game) of which we've had multiple in the past history of this game.

I've been trying to tell you guys that the mechanics should be changed since twenty freakin' twelve but none you listened, you insist "oh no Fuddy Duddy, LRM mechanics are perfectly designed with no flaws whatsoever."

[Metus regem]

FupDup, on 15 May 2018 - 11:58 AM, said:

Lurms are tricky to buff because their problems mostly stem from flawed mechanics rather than XML number values. They pretty much have to be kept weak in the XML number sense because otherwise their mechanics would create another Lurmageddon episode (Lurms ruling the game) of which we've had multiple in the past history of this game.

I've been trying to tell you guys that the mechanics should be changed since twenty freakin' twelve but none you listened, you insist "oh no Fuddy Duddy, LRM mechanics are perfectly designed with no flaws whatsoever."

I've been in your corner on this one Fup... but if there is one thing that I have seen that is consistent with this community is that they have a hard time telling their backsides from a hole in the ground when it comes to the mechanics that cripple the game....

Everything from how LRM/s actually work, to perfect convergence on our weapon system...

[Lykaon]

Bombast, on 14 May 2018 - 09:03 AM, said:

LRMs just got buffed.



LRMs are low risk.

Are they though?

If you sit in the back letting your team win for you the risks are lower but honestly, This strategy only works when the enemy allows it.

And it takes a team's failure to exploit the inherent weakness in having an LRM boat "safely" in the rear to allow a Lurmer to "succeed" .

A fast skirmisher is the PAPER to a Lurm-boat's ROCK. If that LRM boat is in the rear it's vulnerable to attack. So at risk of being assassinated.

If that Lurmboat is in the pack with it's team it's potentially being exposed to direct fire trades that it can't hope to win as well as being easily over run due to the massive minimum range. Both prospects are "risky" due to having easily exploited weaknesses inherent to your main offensive weapons.


When you toss all the countermeasures into the mix the "rewards" for using LRMs are pretty low.

I just gave up on LRMs I don't use them anymore jumping through flaming hoops to land a volley of dispersed damage that is partially shot down by AMS and not easily repeated due to ECM and radar derper proliferation just ain't worth the effort.

I could just sit across the map and spam gauss shells at targets 1km out.

[Scyther]

Fortunately, the new and improved 'Too Many Buckets' MatchMaker has already buffed LRMs, making them more effective by adding low-tier players to virtually all your matches, even if you are tier 1!

[Belkor]

LRMs high risk? Are you kidding? You literally sit behind the team aiming in the general direction of the enemy. Direct fire weapons actually require you to aim with precision and go face to face with the enemy.

[Brain Cancer]

Vellron2005, on 14 May 2018 - 11:35 PM, said:

P.S.

You know why Trail mechs don't have AMS? Because Trial mechs use community made meta-builds. And the tryhards don't use AMS. They will rather cram as many lasers and dakka as can fit. This is also why Trial mechs are never dedicated LRM boats. (which should also be featured in Trials to teach new players how to LRM boat).

You missed the Stalker-3F(C) completely.

https://mwo.smurfy-n...b#i=136&l=stock

Mind you, if I was doing this as a Trial design, I'd do this:

https://mwo.smurfy-n...30ea3a7a418045d

Generous heat curve, avoids ghost heat issues entirely, comes with AMS and respectable ammo bins. Yeah, it doesn't push the limits on firepower, but an unskilled ride shouldn't.

[Vellron2005]

Brain Cancer, on 15 May 2018 - 05:10 PM, said:

You missed the Stalker-3F(C) completely.

https://mwo.smurfy-n...b#i=136&l=stock

Mind you, if I was doing this as a Trial design, I'd do this:

https://mwo.smurfy-n...30ea3a7a418045d

Generous heat curve, avoids ghost heat issues entirely, comes with AMS and respectable ammo bins. Yeah, it doesn't push the limits on firepower, but an unskilled ride shouldn't.

Both builds are mixed LRM and lasers, which is not bad in itself, (I play some mechs like that), but in my comment I said "dedicated LRM boats", which means 50+ tubes and small lasers or machine guns or no backups at all cose' the hardpoints won't allow them on all-missile mechs.. (Although I did miss that one, but that's not the point)

Mixed builds and dedicated LRM boats have completely different play styles.. The builds you provided are correct, but again, not representative of the term "LRM boat", and dedicated LRM boats will usually not carry AMS since it is useless for them, as they are too far back to make effective use of them or be targeted by LRMs very often themselves.

The builds you provided are obsolete on today's battlefield.. If you bring that out, you will rely on your lasers a lot more than on LRMs, meaning you will spend your time much closer to the enemy, and will be using LRM only situationaly, while if you were a dedicated LRM boat, you would position differently, further away from the enemy, and at different angles/behind cover, so I would not say those mixed builds are good representations of LRM boats as a playstyle.

Also, LRM30-40 will be countered by a single Irondome, so those builds are limited in use.

Since most Trial mechs are community built meta-mechs, if you want LRM boats represented, do it with a Supernova SNV-A, Highlander or Highlander IIC (those with 4 missile slots), an Awesome AWS-8R, Warhawk, Mad Dog, MadCat MCII-4, Catapults, Arctic Wolf, Trebuche, or missile-based Hunchback and Hunchback IIC.

Belkor, on 15 May 2018 - 04:59 PM, said:

LRMs high risk? Are you kidding? You literally sit behind the team aiming in the general direction of the enemy. Direct fire weapons actually require you to aim with precision and go face to face with the enemy.

LRMs ARE high risk, because you will have an inherently bad time on some maps (like Rubellite or the new Solaris City), and if you get rushed by a fast light with a half-descent pilot, you're toast on most occasions..

LRM boats are similarly high-risk as pure SRM boats, for reversed reasons (range limitations)..

Edited by Vellron2005, 15 May 2018 - 11:14 PM.

[Pain G0D]

LURMS dont suck , people just dont like getting killed by them .

[RJF Volkodav]

LRMs suck against skilled opponents.

Easy way to buff LRMs for high tiers and leave as it is for low tiers.
Make LRM spread and acceleration/velocity dependent on a time reticle held on an enemy mech/location. I.e. if you fire LRMs inderct as today - spread is the same as today. If you are able to get direct LOS and hold your target in a reticle LRM spread becomes less as you track target, launched LRMs starting to get lower trajectory and/or higher acceleration/speed. If you are able to track target/component long enough you can get a powerfull "pinpoint" or low spread weapon, but at a cost of facetanking for a long time.

Edited by RJF Volkodav, 15 May 2018 - 11:36 PM.

[Kroete]

RJF Volkodav, on 15 May 2018 - 11:32 PM, said:

LRMs suck against skilled opponents.

Easy way to buff LRMs for high tiers and leave as it is for low tiers.
Make LRM spread ....

Suggest this a few years ago sometimes:
Increase the missilespread a lot, but counter it with artemis/tag/narc to get the same spread and with artemis+tag you get less spread then now.

Makes lrms indirect fire spreading the damage over the whole enemy and maybe even the mechs around, but doing low damage overall because big spread.
Using tag or artemis makes lrms like they are now, so you need a spotter for useable indirect or get your own locks.
But if you get your own locks with artemis+tag you can core enemys now, because you get lower spread then now.

Maybe this simple xml sollution is too simple?

Edited by Kroete, 16 May 2018 - 01:48 AM.