154 replies to this topic

[KoalaBrownie]

Chados, on 08 August 2018 - 09:07 AM, said:

Let’s understand what they’re doing: Removing Artemis lock time and tracking bonuses. They already significantly nerfed Artemis spread boosts, and in concert with this they are tightening lock angle by 50%, and nerfing NARC, and buffing ECM.

Why would anyone invest a ton of weight and a crit slot per launcher for a virtually nonexistent spread bonus, after this? Why would any LRM user do anything other than boat as many launchers as possible and hide at the map edges? How does this not reward the worst, most spudly LRM play? ATMs and Clan SSRMs aren’t that prevalent as to justify a banhammer like this. I run lights these days. I can counter streaks. I can usually counter LRM boats. Why are we now encouraging the worst potato play in derogation of using LRMs tactically and sharing armor? The devs claim that they don’t want any weapon system to be irrelevant. Artemis, after this, is wholly irrelevant!

Quit perpetuating this fallacy about LRM boats needing to share armour. If your team is doing their job correctly, the Light mechs will be spotting while being fast enough to avoid most retaliatory fire. So the LRMs can deliver damage while mitigating or avoiding damage in return.

Removing lock-on bonuses will reinforce the light or medium mech as a spotter, as they will need to keep a lock to give the LRM boat a lock in turn (or drop Narc on a target). It will also get rid of this nonsense of an LRM mech popping up for a split second with TAG, getting a lock, and firing to full effect with little fear of retaliation.

Artemis IV shouldn't give tracking bonuses, only damage bonuses (spread reduction). Tracking bonuses are given by Artemis V. Nerfing Narc, TAG and Artemis may simply be in preparation for their inclusion.

LRMs are the only weapons with indirect fire capabilities. Arguing against that, asking for its removal, is a failure to understand Battletech. It's also arguing for a game where lights are less relevant and where gameplay is more generic and consequently more boring. Don't want indirect LRMs? Go play something else. Streak LRMs also cannot be fired indirectly so when they are finally introduced they will fill the role of a direct-fire LRMs. Though technically ATMs should have indirect fire either and yet they kinda do so who knows how Streak LRMs will operate.

Edited by KoalaBrownie, 08 August 2018 - 10:48 AM.

[Eisenhorne]

Mystere, on 08 August 2018 - 10:19 AM, said:

FTFY for a different viewpoint.

Do you play faction play? Have you faced a team that uses LRM boats (6+ LRM assaults without backup weapons) and 2 dedicated NARC lights on an open map? If not, you do not know what many of us are complaining about. It is completely broken on Boreal, Polar, Alpine, and Caustic. It is not an issue in quick play or in other maps. It's a specific case, but it makes those games extremely lame to play. I'd be OK with removing those maps from faction honestly, unless they can fix this somehow.

Edited by Eisenhorne, 08 August 2018 - 10:55 AM.

[Ghogiel]

Savage Wolf, on 08 August 2018 - 05:33 AM, said:

Yeah...

Wait..

Brawler focused cold maps!? You had me dreaming there for a minute. Then I remembered that all cold maps are open terrain. There used to be Frozen City, but then they ****** it up. Ah, good times before that.

Learn to read.

[Mystere]

Eisenhorne, on 08 August 2018 - 10:50 AM, said:

Do you play faction play? Have you faced a team that uses LRM boats (6+ LRM assaults without backup weapons) and 2 dedicated NARC lights on an open map? If not, you do not know what many of us are complaining about. It is completely broken on Boreal, Polar, Alpine, and Caustic. It is not an issue in quick play or in other maps. It's a niche case, but it makes those games extremely lame to play.

FYI, when I used to play it heavily, it was I who brought LRMs and/or NARCs/TAG/whatever to the party, thank you very much. People laughed then. I guess those same people are not laughing now. <maniacal >

It was also I who brought the AMS as well, and organized the umbrella if the team had enough of them.


In a related note, would you mind switching to Clan Wolf for this weekend's event? I think I'll be playing.

Edited by Mystere, 08 August 2018 - 11:19 AM.

[Kalimaster]

I can see the buff to ECM and approve, but nerfing LRM's is not the answer. So you score damage, but you really don't get the kill. Lasers and Ballistic have gotten nerfed to the point where LRM's seem like a really good weapon. Lets buff Lasers and ballistic back up some, leave LRM's alone. Clan ER Large Lasers flat out stink as a weapon now, and the rate of fire for most lasers is negated by heat. Buff and build instead of nerf, we can make things better without bringing the nerf gun to the table.

[Drenath]

Goals:
Improve LRM effectiveness vs more skilled opponents.
Better-reward teamwork/builds centered around supporting indirect fire.
Inhibit "low-risk" indirect fire practices that do not require teamwork.

Ideas for improvements:
Missiles with a target lock (with, or without missile lock) can be tracked into that target post-launch.
If you fire at a target with missile lock, your missiles can track that target even if you switch targets.
Your own TAG/NARC/TC/Artemis will steer your own missiles very accurately toward a targeted location.
NARC duration is infinite.

Ideas for nerfs:
Missile lock advances only as the target is visible.
UAV's do not assist with missile locks or tracking.
Target Decay skill tree nodes do not assist with missile locks or tracking.
Friendly locks do not assist with missile locks or tracking (unless friendly has CC and LOS to target)
NARC is destroyed when the component hit is destroyed. (If armor, when that section's armor is stripped)
NARC deactivates when a 'mech it hits shuts down for 10 seconds.

Other:
Missile physics adjusted to fire with a flat trajectory and accelerate over distance (as if they were missiles!)
Missile physics adjusted such that lighter and faster 'mechs may avoid tracked missile hits.
Assault mechs have a minimum of three AMS hard points.
Heavy mechs have a minimum of two AMS hard points.

Scoring:
Missiles that hit a target will credit damage evenly to 'mechs that participated in missile tracking, provided those 'mechs are in view of the targeted 'mech when the missiles hit.

Edited by Drenath, 08 August 2018 - 02:24 PM.

[MischiefSC]

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 10:29 AM, said:

Quit perpetuating this fallacy about LRM boats needing to share armour. If your team is doing their job correctly, the Light mechs will be spotting while being fast enough to avoid most retaliatory fire. So the LRMs can deliver damage while mitigating or avoiding damage in return.

Removing lock-on bonuses will reinforce the light or medium mech as a spotter, as they will need to keep a lock to give the LRM boat a lock in turn (or drop Narc on a target). It will also get rid of this nonsense of an LRM mech popping up for a split second with TAG, getting a lock, and firing to full effect with little fear of retaliation.

Artemis IV shouldn't give tracking bonuses, only damage bonuses (spread reduction). Tracking bonuses are given by Artemis V. Nerfing Narc, TAG and Artemis may simply be in preparation for their inclusion.

LRMs are the only weapons with indirect fire capabilities. Arguing against that, asking for its removal, is a failure to understand Battletech. It's also arguing for a game where lights are less relevant and where gameplay is more generic and consequently more boring. Don't want indirect LRMs? Go play something else. Streak LRMs also cannot be fired indirectly so when they are finally introduced they will fill the role of a direct-fire LRMs. Though technically ATMs should have indirect fire either and yet they kinda do so who knows how Streak LRMs will operate.

If you don't understand armor sharing and why its critical to success the gap in your understanding of this game is pretty big and it makes it hard to even begin to discuss the topic with you. It's even a key behavior for success on tabletop battletech.

MWO is a FPS, not an RTS tabletop game. If you dont want a FPS PvP game based on battletech there are options for you now. I can't say Mechwarrior 4, because in that as well LRMs were direct fire. While LRMs can have an indirect fire mode in MWO it's always going to be flat out inferior to direct fire. So you either need to accept that or turn them in to a direct fire weapon that can be balanced against everything else.

[The6thMessenger]

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 08:53 AM, said:

Yes let's remove LRM indirect fire and make light mechs even more useless as the spotting role disappears.

You do realize that, if they made NARC and TAG mandatory for Indirect-Fire, they could buff the Direct-Fire accordingly that it wouldn't suck? And when they use the NARC and TAG that allows the LRMs (now heavily buffed) for indirect fire, now it's much stronger.

The spotting role, with even stronger LRMs is now also stronger, is now more valuable than ever because of their synergy with LRMs. That being said, TAG needs to be invisible, only visible with Thermal-Vision and Night-Vision.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 08:53 AM, said:

One needn't worry about 6thMessenger's diatribe, the game will never adopt those ideas. Dude just needs to get good.

Lol. K.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 08 August 2018 - 02:17 PM.

[KoalaBrownie]

MischiefSC, on 08 August 2018 - 02:15 PM, said:

If you don't understand armor sharing and why its critical to success the gap in your understanding of this game is pretty big and it makes it hard to even begin to discuss the topic with you. It's even a key behavior for success on tabletop battletech.

Blah blah personal attack blah blah. Heard it all before.
Inflicting damage while taking no damage in return is superior to armor sharing. Case closed.
Being able to concentrate fire from multiple attackers onto one target without LOS is superior to direct fire as well.

The problem is not that LRM boats don't share armor, the problem is that direct-damage dealers rush the enemy before the LRMs have properly softened them up.

MischiefSC, on 08 August 2018 - 02:15 PM, said:

MWO is a FPS, not an RTS tabletop game.

RTS? Yeah okay buddy.

MischiefSC, on 08 August 2018 - 02:15 PM, said:

While LRMs can have an indirect fire mode in MWO it's always going to be flat out inferior to direct fire. So you either need to accept that or turn them in to a direct fire weapon that can be balanced against everything else.

Wrong for the reasons listed above.

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 02:16 PM, said:

You do realize that, if they made NARC and TAG mandatory for Indirect-Fire, they could buff the Direct-Fire accordingly that it wouldn't suck? And when they use the NARC and TAG that allows the LRMs (now heavily buffed) for indirect fire, now it's much stronger.

The spotting role, with even stronger LRMs is now also stronger, is now more valuable than ever because of their synergy with LRMs. That being said, TAG needs to be invisible, only visible with Thermal-Vision and Night-Vision.

You didn't make the spotting role stronger you just limited it to a few specialized mechs with the proper equipment. You're trying to make spotting rare and direct fire better to influence LRM players to play as direct-fire mechs as they can no longer consistently rely on spotters being in-game.

Instead, howabout you let other players play in the way that THEY want to play, not the way you want them to play.

Edited by KoalaBrownie, 08 August 2018 - 03:19 PM.

[Thorqemada]

If the Problem is indirct fire from hidden LRM Mechs behind walls that simply leech from their Teams success and Anger the OpFor then i do not understand why and how a nerf to the direct LOS Equipment Artemis is the solution.

Especcially Artemis works only for the Mech that equips it and should not be nerfed - in contrary it should be buffed.

If indirect LRM fire is indeed unsportsmanlike than simply increase the basic spread of LRM so that indirect fire without LOS is very ineffective and that LRM Mechs need a LOS to the target which means the Target can shot back and we have a sportmanslike Situation.

To encourage that you then need to buff the direct LRM fire which first and foremeost means Artemis bcs it is THE LRM Mech Bound direct fire only LRM buffing mechanism you have - make the Artemis spread decrease outweight the Basic spread nerf and suddenly all LRM Mech will go for a LOS to the target and no longer hide and leech success.

NARC and TAG Need to stay weak bcs they can be used atm for indirect fire buffs of LRM as they work LRM Mech indepoendant - contrary to Artemis!

Buffing Artemis therfore is the sensible move!

PS: Lock On nerfs will encourage Long range Combat to counter such nerf bcs it is easier to maintain lock on Long range than on short range!!!111

Edited by Thorqemada, 08 August 2018 - 02:36 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 02:27 PM, said:

Blah blah personal attack blah blah. Heard it all before.

If only you actually understand.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 02:27 PM, said:

Inflicting damage while taking no damage in return is superior to armor sharing. Case closed.

Better for you. Not for the team as a whole.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 02:27 PM, said:

Being able to concentrate fire from multiple attackers onto one target without LOS is superior to direct fire as well.

Not if they want to ruin the game anymore than they did. Indirect-Fire, being precisely that is why LRMs are ****-tier.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 02:27 PM, said:

The problem is not that LRM boats don't share armor, the problem is that direct-damage dealers rush the enemy before the LRMs have properly softened them up.

With LRMs being a piss-poor weapon, I could understand the impatience.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 02:27 PM, said:

Wrong for the reasons listed above.

If only we were following troll logic.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 02:27 PM, said:

You didn't make the spotting role stronger you just limited it to a few specialized mechs with the proper equipment.

Yes, and because they are specialized, they are much stronger. If they are doing the spotting role, then they surely be equipped for it. You shouldn't be spotting if you have major weapons for dealing damage. How is that a hard logic to follow?

[Rafe Yomin]

Darakor Stormwind, on 08 August 2018 - 08:54 AM, said:

I currently mostly play a Crab 27 fielding 2 AMS. I rarely see more than 3-4 AMS in the field and that is including those I bring. I rarely see the odd match where we actually have 6-8 AMS.

But I feel that calling an AMS a counter to LRM is somewhat generous. I bring 4400 ammo into the field. In the end results screen, with using 2 AMS nodes, that usually leads to around 600-650 missiles destroyed. I am told that a good lurmer fields at least 3500 missiles. So what I just did is neutralise 20% of the lurmers firepower. Or more precisely, I probably neutralised half the missiles a lurm boat shoots for the first 2 minutes of the match.

All AMS does is buy some time. But when reading the comments on the boards it often sounds like 3 tons of equipment completely neutralise 100 tons of Battlemech.

So if you could upgrade your armor to take 10% less laser damage or ballistic damage, for the price of 1,5 tons (for clans, guessing 2 for IS? Also just using the weight of 1 AMS, so halving the percentage neutralized to make a fair representation), you wouldn't take it? If everyone would take that, it would mean a lot of neutralized fire. It's not really fair to want something which neutralizes ALL of the LRM's on the field though. That'd be the same as someone telling you they need a shield which defends against all damage so they can neutralize 1 entire mech completely. That's not fun for that mech either. Imagine something like a NARC but which would shut down your weapon systems for 30 seconds. It'd be horrible.

[KoalaBrownie]

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 02:36 PM, said:

Better for you. Not for the team as a whole.

Who said I was talking about the LRM boat? I was talking about the team. If your whole team except for the spotters is out of LOS then you can rain LRMs down before you even get shot.

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 02:36 PM, said:

Yes, and because they are specialized, they are much stronger. If they are doing the spotting role, then they surely be equipped for it. You shouldn't be spotting if you have major weapons for dealing damage. How is that a hard logic to follow?

So your brilliant solution is to force mechs to specialize, and then drop into random teams of 11 other players who may or may not benefit from their support.

Tell me what's better for a team? A specialized support mech with no one to help and no weapons to contribute? Or an LRM boat that is delivering constant damage but not taking enemy shots?

[Iron Buccaneer]

Too many people ditch AMS to maximize their high alpha builds. I have no sympathy. Too many LRM boat pilots don't know the best range for engagement is 200-400 meters and that direct lock is always better than indirect so they get their missiles shot down more easily and enemy mechs evade/find cover more easily. No sympathy there either.

[The6thMessenger]

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 03:26 PM, said:

Who said I was talking about the LRM boat? I was talking about the team. If your whole team except for the spotters is out of LOS then you can rain LRMs down before you even get shot.

Sure, but the spotters now take the heat. Not to mention, what happens when enemy managed to close the distance? What then?

TheB33f's Maximum LRM was nice, but it's hardly the best approach. With how LRMs are today, Indirect Fire isn't that powerful, it's far faster and more efficient to actually step out the cover and shoot with your ACs and Lasers than to just lazily lurm with a spotter that unless it's a dedicated spotter and/or the target is out of position, you won't be doing good damage because most missiles misses.

Not taking damage while lurming is only really meritable if lurming is actually a good weapon system to begin with. If only you understand that.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 03:26 PM, said:

So your brilliant solution is to force mechs to specialize, and then drop into random teams of 11 other players who may or may not benefit from their support.

Yes. At least the LRMs are now aren't dead weight as a result. And the dedicated spotters are more useful when there's LRM boats in the team. They won't be useful when there aren't LRMs in the team with the change, just as before the change, so that's not exactly an issue.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 03:26 PM, said:

Tell me what's better for a team? A specialized support mech with no one to help and no weapons to contribute? Or an LRM boat that is delivering constant damage but not taking enemy shots?

Why would not taking enemy shots be better for the team? He's not sharing armor.

It would be better for the team to have a weapon system that could pull it's own weight without the reliance to other teammates. It would be better for the team, to have a specialized support mech, WHEN there's someone to help. They're supposed to be spotters. They aren't useful without LRM teammates before, they won't be useful now, there's no difference.

Lets put this this way:

Pre Change:
LRMs alone = ****
LRMs + Spotter = Tolerable
Spotter alone = ****.

Post Change:
LRMs alone = Decent
LRMs + Spotter = Great
Spotter alone = ****

Is that really hard to understand? We could get more for the game after the change, as opposed of keeping the LRMs and Spotters utterly ****.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 08 August 2018 - 03:55 PM.

[Chados]

Iron Buccaneer, on 08 August 2018 - 03:37 PM, said:

Too many people ditch AMS to maximize their high alpha builds. I have no sympathy. Too many LRM boat pilots don't know the best range for engagement is 200-400 meters and that direct lock is always better than indirect so they get their missiles shot down more easily and enemy mechs evade/find cover more easily. No sympathy there either.

That’s now. After the Artemis nerf and ECM buff they’re going to do next patch, AMS will be irrelevant. Why bother with it? It’s a ton and a half that can better be used for a TC1 and more armor. After Artemis is nerfed, lock and tracking bonuses will be a thing of the past, meaning that Artemis becomes a waste of tonnage that only the spudliest spuds will bother with. Its spread bonus got trashed a few patches ago already. If you’re carrying Artemis on a Catapult with two LRM15s, along with AMS and a ton of ammo, you can drop all that and save 3 1/2 tons and four crit slots right there without any other changes.

After the nerfs, LRMs will be even more spready than they already are. You’ll be able to slat off a LRM barrage long enough to get to cover on many maps, and along with the planned reversion to a Godly blanket of ECM that only one or two mechs will have to cast to cover the team again, who needs AMS in the first place? Even on Polar you ought to be able to defeat LRM boats unless you get separated from the team and caught in the open. And with the lock angle nerf of 50% LRM skirmishing from close range will become impractical-too hard to obtain and hold locks, so the only viable LRM play will be boating and hiding from long range anyway, with all the boats waiting for you to make a mistake and becoming light-bait. So, after the nerfs the boating will increase, the hiding from map edges will increase, and light mechs like the Piranha will feast because SSRMs are also getting nuked with the lock angle and Artemis lock time nerfs. These nerfs and changes reward and encourage the spudliest playstyle for missiles at the expense of all the others and the salt directed at said LRM hider/spuds will flow like a raging river.

I haven’t a clue why this is the playstyle Paul and Chris want to promote, but evidently, they do. They aren’t even giving us a PTS on this one-Paul must have got clobbered by a couple ALRM-80 Supernovas in game, the last set of real LRM nerfs happened after a LRMfest on him a couple years ago, as I recall.

Edited by Chados, 08 August 2018 - 04:25 PM.

[KoalaBrownie]

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

Sure, but the spotters now take the heat. Not to mention, what happens when enemy managed to close the distance? What then?

It's the spotters job to take the heat. Don't want the job? Drive something else.
When the enemy close the distance the untouched direct-fire mechs attack the enemy that has been softened up by LRMs.

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

TheB33f's Maximum LRM was nice, but it's hardly the best approach. With how LRMs are today, Indirect Fire isn't that powerful, it's far faster and more efficient to actually step out the cover and shoot with your ACs and Lasers than to just lazily lurm with a spotter that unless it's a dedicated spotter and/or the target is out of position, you won't be doing good damage because most missiles misses.

LRMs allow concentration of fire within the given range, barring intervening terrain. If a direct fire mechs attacks a target, destroys it, and there are no other targets about he has to turn and trundle back to the battle.

If an LRM mech helps destroy a target, and there are no other targets in that area, he just switches to another target within his range that another portion of the team is engaging.

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

Not taking damage while lurming is only really meritable if lurming is actually a good weapon system to begin with. If only you understand that.

What I understand is that your motivation is not to buff LRMs, your motivation is to change the way that LRMs are played. If you only cared about LRMs you would be talking numbers, not trying to have direct fire buffed and spotting restricted.

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

Yes. At least the LRMs are now aren't dead weight as a result. And the dedicated spotters are more useful when there's LRM boats in the team. They won't be useful when there aren't LRMs in the team with the change, just as before the change, so that's not exactly an issue.

Just as before the change? Lies.
If mechs don't need dedicated equipment anyone can be a spotter. The Piranha MG boat? Spotter. Artic Wolf SRM boat? Spotter. Raven ER LL sniper? Spotter. None of them need Narc or Tag just the "R" key to be a spotter.

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

Why would not taking enemy shots be better for the team? He's not sharing armor.

Winning the game isn't about taking damage. It's about inflicting damage. Gaining local superiority in the battle, with higher superiority resulting in quicker enemy deaths. LRMs allow can add to the superiority so long as they are in range.

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 03:46 PM, said:

Pre Change:
LRMs alone = ****
LRMs + Spotter = Tolerable
Spotter alone = ****.

Incorrect as already stated.
Spotters don't need specialized equipment and can be like a Piranha, able to kill mechs single-handily.

Edited by KoalaBrownie, 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

It's the spotters job to take the heat. Don't want the job? Drive something else.

You know what's funny? Not a lot of people does, we don't want to take the heat for you to rack up the damage numbers, and pretend like you carried the team. This is why LRMs being indirect-fire is hardly worth it.

People with direct fire don't need LRM boats, LRM players only wanting to play indirect-fire need direct-fire people.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

When the enemy close the distance the untouched direct-fire mechs attack the enemy that has been softened up by LRMs.

Considering how LRMs are right now, they are inadequately soft, and given that LRM boats probably don't have adequate direct-fire weapon to deal with in the first place, they'll stomp you.

Also, pokers, need not to close in the range as well. at 400m, they are right at home, and they will delete components, and back to their cover.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

LRMs allow concentration of fire within the given range, barring intervening terrain. If a direct fire mechs attacks a target, destroys it, and there are no other targets about he has to turn and trundle back to the battle.

If an LRM mech helps destroy a target, and there are no other targets in that area, he just switches to another target within his range that another portion of the team is engaging.

Yes, duh. The problem is trade off.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

What I understand is that your motivation is not to buff LRMs, your motivation is to change the way that LRMs are played. If you only cared about LRMs you would be talking numbers, not trying to have direct fire buffed and spotting restricted.

The problem is that you are defending this problematic playstyle that is precisely why LRMs is weak. No, I care about the LRMs, I simply do not care about the parasitic playstyle

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

Just as before the change? Lies.

Really? Bring a dedicated NARC or TAG mech. Tell us how useful it is without LRM allies on the team.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

If mechs don't need dedicated equipment anyone can be a spotter. The Piranha MG boat? Spotter. Artic Wolf SRM boat? Spotter. Raven ER LL sniper? Spotter.

I think you're confusing a spotter from a sniper/poker.

If you're shooting while you're spotting, you ain't spotting properly. That gives away your position, and prevents you from spotting because you have to break line of sight to not get shot at, and this in turn breaks the lock for your team LRM boat. You need that reliable lock to land missiles, you should know that, you seem to be one of these parasitic lurm enthusiast.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

None of them need Narc or Tag just the "R" key to be a spotter.

Then, they aren't a dedicated spotter. And what does that result? A piss poor weapon system they are so afraid to buff because it can snowball.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

Winning the game isn't about taking damage. It's about inflicting damage. Gaining local superiority in the battle, with higher superiority resulting in quicker enemy deaths. LRMs allow can add to the superiority so long as they are in range.

You deal damage more when you survive for longer.

And again, that's the problem why they are inferior weapons. They need to be good on their own.

KoalaBrownie, on 08 August 2018 - 05:11 PM, said:

Incorrect as already stated. Spotters don't need specialized equipment and can be like a Piranha, able to kill mechs single-handily.

And as i have stated, they will poorly do their spotting duties if that's the case, the LRMs won't reliably function as a result. This is why we need LRMs to be powerful, and specialized spotters that will result into a powerful combination.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 08 August 2018 - 05:45 PM.

[Mystere]

The6thMessenger, on 08 August 2018 - 02:16 PM, said:

You do realize that, if they made NARC and TAG mandatory for Indirect-Fire, they could buff the Direct-Fire accordingly that it wouldn't suck? And when they use the NARC and TAG that allows the LRMs (now heavily buffed) for indirect fire, now it's much stronger.

The spotting role, with even stronger LRMs is now also stronger, is now more valuable than ever because of their synergy with LRMs. That being said, TAG needs to be invisible, only visible with Thermal-Vision and Night-Vision.

I m still not convinced that making LRMs primarily a direct fire weapon is the best thing. It just reeks too much of harmonization for my taste.

I'd rather LRMS be kept as a primarily indirect fire weapon and make improvements on the interplay between countermeasures (e.g. AMS) and force multipliers (e.g. TAG). That should go a long way in improving the currently almost non-existent information warfare pillar^(*) of the game.

(*) Does anyone still remember those?

Edited by Mystere, 08 August 2018 - 07:06 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Mystere, on 08 August 2018 - 06:48 PM, said:

I m still not convinced that making LRMs primarily a direct fire weapon is the best thing. It just reeks too much of harmonization for my taste.

Well, we've tried indirect-fire primary, didn't really go well either.

Do you play Doom (2016)? Would you agree that the frag grenade sucks? Well I would argue that is because it's unlimited ammo, and is on cooldown. Make the grenade limited, now it has a reason to be powerful because you don't have a lot of it. Just as the Big-******-Gun is now a complete badass room-clearer, because you only get 3 shots and ammo's rare -- as opposed of the original game only consuming 15 energy per shot.

Kind of the same thought: the approach of mandatory TAG and NARC for Indirect-Fire, provides reason with having a powerful indirect fire, and this forced synergy for TAG and NARC ultimately gives them a role that only they could do. Because Indirect Fire is far less available, just as a limited amount of grenade, it has an adequate amount of reason to be powerful, and because it's powerful and the only way to provide Indirect fire, the dedicated-spotters are now more valuable.

Mystere, on 08 August 2018 - 06:48 PM, said:

I'd rather LRMS be kept as a primarily indirect fire weapon and make improvements on the interplay between countermeasures (e.g.) and force multipliers (e.g. TAG). That should go a long way in improving the currently almost non-existent information warfare pillar^(*) of the game.

Improvements on the interplay between counter measures how? TAG weakens AMS? Does ECM make a fake target?

I'm down on improving information warfare. But as far as we're concerned, LRMs won't still be contributing much on it's own. It's still going to leech from others, it still makes focus-fire rather easy, and because of that it could not be buffed. This only shifts the problem, but doesn't really address it.

LRMs being indirect fire need guys to spot for them, the guys using indirect fire doesn't, this is why more often the LRMs when employed as indirect-fire primarily becomes a deadweight to players that could not -- and more importantly would not -- spot for them. **** needs to be addressed.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 08 August 2018 - 07:12 PM.