100 replies to this topic

[panzer1b]

Gotta love all dem missile nerf after missile nerf. Missiles are (with very exceptions) THE worst weapon in the entire game for many reasons. Their damage is inefficient and terribly spread, the lockon mechanics are terrible and if the enemy has any one of 10+ counters, your missiles will hit the dirt or fail to lock at all, and even if they hit, a LRM-80 is the equivalent of 3 AC-10s in terms of effective damage most of the time.

I dont know, maybee im just bad with missiles, but i just dont see missiles of any form dominating QP, and the only situations where missiles are really scary is a 12man running 2 dedicated narcers supported by at least 2 lances of LRM-80s, that will demolish a team pretty fast, but so will just about any other coordinated setup, including 12 heavy gauss cyclops/victors, gauss vomit MCII spam, 12 dakka mechs, ect. Any build style works incredibly well if the entire team plays it, and even then, the only time i see the LRM strat work is on a handful of maps, namely polar, alpine, and caustic. Any other map it can be countered, and even on those maps it falls apart when facing coordinated ERLL/ERPPC/GR spam at long ranges provided the team focuses the narcer lights before the entire team gets narced.

[Spheroid]

Khobai, on 21 August 2018 - 10:25 AM, said:

ECM shouldnt even grant stealth at all. period.

What traits to you propose to offset the loss of dorrito invisibility? Instant radar dep? Massive target info time penalty?

It needs to be equal or greater set of benefits than investing in BAP or TC1/2 or it will never be equipped. Also nerfing it too much will result in the extinction of the Hellbringer and light ECM snipers. Why bring a Hellbringer with ER when an Ebon can do the same thing better (minus quirks). Reducing the utility of ECM will just lead to the extinction of the Hellbringer if and when other similar heavies come out like the Rifleman IIC which have a plethora of high mounts and complete build freedom. The ECM was the only saving grace.

Edited by Spheroid, 21 August 2018 - 12:52 PM.

[HammerMaster]

Spheroid, on 21 August 2018 - 12:52 PM, said:

Reducing the utility of ECM will just lead to the extinction of the Hellbringer

Good.
Too many dirt bag mode armorless armed mechs going around.
ECM by book rules does NOT grant Null signature style stealth.

[Mystere]

Khobai, on 21 August 2018 - 10:25 AM, said:

ECM shouldnt even grant stealth at all. period.

ECM should be reverted to its original form: both red and blue doritos disappearing when within the ECM umbrella.

[HammerMaster]

Mystere, on 21 August 2018 - 01:23 PM, said:

ECM should be reverted to its original form: both red and blue doritos disappearing when within the ECM umbrella.

While that would be hilarious.
I'd prefer it work as advertised in the book.
Disable Artemis, c3 etc.
http://www.sarna.net...rdian_ECM_Suite

Affected systems include Artemis IV, C3 and C3i Computer networks, and Narc Missile Beacons. A Guardian can jam a Beagle Active Probe (or its Clan equivalent), but the probe-equipped unit will be aware of the jamming. The Capellan Confederation expanded the utility of the Guardian even more with the introduction of Stealth Armor.[1] Contemporary guided missiles such as standard LRM or Streak SRMs are not affected by the Guardian suite and will be able to achieve hard lock as normal.[6]

I've quoted this multiple times since PGIs implementation (erroneous and aberrant).
And multiple times it was not addressed or answered by staff to why they don't BattleTech in BattleTech (MechWarrior is BattleTech).

Edited by HammerMaster, 21 August 2018 - 01:52 PM.

[Spheroid]

@Hammster: In this very thread lurm users are declaring that they will remove Artmeis from their launchers. If it negates nothing ECM is a waste of tonnage. It must provide benefits in multiple combat situations or it will not be chosen over other equipment of similar weight.

[HammerMaster]

Spheroid, on 21 August 2018 - 01:55 PM, said:

@Hammster: In this very thread lurm users are declaring that they will remove Artmeis from their launchers. If it negates nothing ECM is a waste of tonnage. It must provide benefits in multiple combat situations or it will not be chosen over other equipment of similar weight.

I see what you did there.

[Chados]

Well, as I see it I can either run Artemis launchers and give up a ton and a crit for each launcher or skip it, just get the spread bonus from the skill tree, and use the extra tonnage for more engine or more armor or MRMs. The main reason I ran it was for the lock time and tracking bonuses and that’s history. Best way to LRM now is to take them off and run MRMs.

[HammerMaster]

I being an LRM enthusiast WON'T be removing Artemis.
I like the spread reduction bonus.
Are there other GLARING issues with this patch? I think so.
Point is this is again a wandering zero issue.
A rework was called for and denied.
Had there been no free fake c3 lockons we wouldn't be in this pickle IN THE FIRST PLACE!

Edited by HammerMaster, 21 August 2018 - 02:04 PM.

[Spheroid]

There exists equipment that does not justify its expense. The command console is one such piece of equipment. Advanced zoom is not worth three tons.

Artemis negation is not worth 1-1.5 tons alone.

[SilentScreamer]

Mystere, on 21 August 2018 - 01:23 PM, said:

ECM should be reverted to its original form: both red and blue doritos disappearing when within the ECM umbrella.

No way. If I had a nickel for everytime some idiot shot my commando/spider/raven during Beta I would own a small country by now. Half the time it was at startup...how they could think an enemy could get next to them in 15 seconds? The maps were smaller, but not that small.

[Mystere]

HammerMaster, on 21 August 2018 - 01:44 PM, said:

While that would be hilarious.

SilentScreamer, on 21 August 2018 - 02:07 PM, said:

No way. If I had a nickel for everytime some idiot shot my commando/spider/raven during Beta I would own a small country by now. Half the time it was at startup...how they could think an enemy could get next to them in 15 seconds? The maps were smaller, but not that small.

It's precisely the hilarity of it all that I want it to be back. <maniacal >

People rely too much on the red dorito.

[HammerMaster]

Spheroid, on 21 August 2018 - 02:05 PM, said:

There exists equipment that does not justify its expense. The command console is one such piece of equipment. Advanced zoom is not worth three tons.


Artemis negation is not worth 1-1.5 tons alone.

Notice how your decision is changed?
A tactical choice of negating information warfare and minor hit bonuses vs must have magic no see um and LRM breaker for little to no cost?
Pathetic and very telling.

Edited by HammerMaster, 21 August 2018 - 03:01 PM.

[Abaddun]

The hellbringer isn't the only mech that depends on ECM. Both the Thanatos and Hellspawn are generally considered bad mechs accross all variants despite having ECM as standard in each. ECM isn't a magic shield that deflects missiles, it can be countered by a plethera of tools that are available to all mechs.

(I'm not hating on the TNT or HSP, I pilot and enjoy both, I'm just reiterating the view of the community)

[The6thMessenger]

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

You are discounting the possibility of the coolshot being used to bring the heat leavel from above 100% to sub 100% in a short span of time. With the change, you punish vomit builds for hard pushing the heat cap more then what they did before.

A possibility which is a small aspect compared to the rest. Okay, lets prevent the instantaneous overheating -- well we still have laser-vomits being quickly cooled before their next shot.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

Then you open another can of worms by giving consistent heat generators like the Octo AC2 Dire Wolf or quad UltraAC5 Slepnir of augmenting their cooling, allowing them to sustain DPS. Even cooling as minor as an extra 1 EDHS can have a significant impact. You would only be creating another monster.

This is a problem why? I'm pretty sure Seipnir only has 4 ballistic hardpoints, i think you mean annihilator.

And versus laser-pokers, augmented-cooling would be so much better, at least those are just fringe builds. I mean how could you even argue 8x AC2 Dire-wolf which is paywalled, is beyond me.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

I refer back to my point, which you failed to address, this change makes it so that a greater amount of player input is required to attain and maintain locks.

Huh, "Heaven forbid you have to actually look in the direction of a target you want to shoot."

Well, wrong, you do have to look in the direction of a target you want to shoot even before. If your point was to have more effort in taking a lock, that's poorly made.

And i don't disagree with the sentiment of making them work for their own locks, I simply disagree with how they do it. I mean for me, I'd rather mandate the need of TAG and NARC for IDF, so lumers would get their own locks, LRMs be balanced as direct-fire.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

In my opinion you sound very adverse to actually putting any effort into you gameplay.

Funny, you sound very adverse and hostile to opinions that disagree with yours. Or maybe this is just a personal vendetta against me? Cause it really sounds like you're picking a fight against me. Why the preconceived notion that i just don't want to aim? Why the look at a microscope in my past instead of just evaluating things as is?

But hindsight, I really don't care.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

So far you have demonstrated very little understanding of how changes will impact the game.

Funny, coming from someone who doesn't understand the dire impact this change will affect the already weakened weapon-system.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

Reading through your historical posts, your "balance suggestions" have been outlandish, poorly conceived and show a blatent disregard towards conventional video game balance and lore accuracy

Lol, so my suggestions are out-of-the-box thinking, really that's your issue with them? That's sad. This sounds more like a discussion about me than the actual discussion to the system. And you're not god, not because you disagreed means it's poor.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

(For example, prior to this you wanted to remove ATM minimum range and increase tracking strength, turning them into giant super streaks, when I asked how that was remotely balanced, you responded with "they fire in streams" as if that in any way balances them).

Really? You missed the part where there's 2.4/2.0/1.6 damage. Also streaks are fire-and-forget with bone-tracking, compared to ATMs that you need constant missile lock to track -- it's sad how PGI didn't made them so.

So yeah, no, not super-streaks.

And your example doesn't really prove anything other than you don't really understand what you're talking about.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

Unless you can back it up your "prediction" amounts to little more than an opinion that doesn't even consider the wider context of the changes.

It is an opinion. Albeit it's made based on my experience with the game, and it does seem to resonate with others.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

First off, from what I have seen I might as well be lectured on Uk Housing Law by a toddler, so don't even try and act condescending towards me.

Lol. K.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

Secondly as far as my testing shows Artemis applies to the base value of lock on time, so there are no multiplicative modifiers. Which means Artemis on it's own had an approx 0.25S impact on your lock on speed. When stacked with TAG, lock on speed was reduced to 0.5S approx. Before Aretemis supplanted the lock on time bonus of NARC, but as Artemis only tightens spread now(still an incredibly useful feature which you seem to dismiss out of hand) you, as an LRM boat, will have to actually do some work by bringing a TAG and actual look to line up shots on NARCd targets.

That's like correcting me that the think that killed our friend isn't an "Alligator" but a "Crocodile", there's still a predator in the water that killed our mate, how does that solve anything?

Whether it's flat or multiplicative bonus, guess what there's still a nerf that will have a negative impact on the weapon systems that's the last thing that should be nerfed right now.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

It takes at minimum 16 skill nodes to get 100% radar deprivation, and generally speaking, for some mechs that means 11 skill nodes they won't be using. Essentially, LRMS deplete 12% of a players maximum number of skills if they want to break lock after going into cover AND that's not a sure fire way to completely avoid LRMs as they will still to the point where the target was before the break, so slower, less mobile mechs will still eat a few salvos even if they duck behind cover.

So basically, you refute my point by pointing out that it's balanced by having 12% of your skill nodes at sensor? And point out that it still hits slower less mobile mechs.

Dude, slow and less mobile mechs can be hit with practically anything with range (with good aim and poor target positioning), how is that meritable?

Even then, there's still 88% of skills to fall back on, not to mention that you can still break locks regardless of radar-deprivation, and 40-60% investment is still rather adequate.

It's still giving LRMs a harder time than would-be otherwise, and this isn't warranted.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

I completely disagree, lock on missiles will maintain exact functionality as they do pre patch and nothing will change except ECM mechs being able to blanket more of their team.

And I completely disagree. Artemis no longer giving lock-speed bonus, and having smaller lock-cone would gravely impact every homing-missile on the game.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

For my example I call back to December 2012 when ECM was first introduced. LRMs dealt 1.7 damage per missile at the time to make up for the borked hit reg, but they were still undeniably strong. ECM was introduced and it killed all lockons, and I mean killed. The only operable missile caddies were Commando 2Ds and Raven 3Ls, both which needed TAGs. The popular Streak boat, Catapult A1 was forced out of the meta overnight(though it soon came back as the SplatCat) LRMs were a thing of the past, as you would see entire lances drop in Atlas DDCs.

I don't get this. Are you referencing the need for TAG? What about the ECM buff?

Because with what you just said, "Killed all lockons", is somehow bolstering MY side. That being said, we aren't at 1.7 LRM damage, we'll be at the point that it's what i assume to be 12.5 degree lock from 25 and 45 degrees before, and ECM has far slower lock-time compared to the standard.

So yeah, I doubt your anecdote is applicable to our current situation.

Abaddun, on 21 August 2018 - 11:51 AM, said:

I think I've made my point.

Poor ones.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 21 August 2018 - 07:24 PM.

[Prototelis]

HammerMaster, on 21 August 2018 - 01:44 PM, said:

Affected systems include Artemis IV, C3 and C3i Computer networks, and Narc Missile Beacons. A Guardian can jam a Beagle Active Probe (or its Clan equivalent), but the probe-equipped unit will be aware of the jamming. The Capellan Confederation expanded the utility of the Guardian even more with the introduction of Stealth Armor.[1] Contemporary guided missiles such as standard LRM or Streak SRMs are not affected by the Guardian suite and will be able to achieve hard lock as normal.[6]

That sounds stupid.

This isn't a board game.

[HammerMaster]

Prototelis, on 21 August 2018 - 03:27 PM, said:

That sounds stupid.

This isn't a board game.

If that sounds stupid to you ,you are not here for BattleTech but Some Other Game TM.
Those things quoted were easily translatable.

Edited by HammerMaster, 21 August 2018 - 03:39 PM.

[Dracol]

HammerMaster, on 21 August 2018 - 03:33 PM, said:

If that sounds stupid to you ,you are not here for BattleTech but Some Other Game TM.
Those things quoted were easily translatable.

BattleTech video game is that way ----->
This is Mechwarrior!!!!

(Que 300 video clip)

Edited by Dracol, 21 August 2018 - 03:55 PM.

[HammerMaster]

Dracol, on 21 August 2018 - 03:52 PM, said:

BattleTech video game is that way ----->
This is Mechwarrior!!!!

(Que 300 video clip)

And MechWarrior is derivative of?
Oh ya BattleTech.

[Spheroid]

HammerMaster, on 21 August 2018 - 02:54 PM, said:

Notice how your decision is changed?
A tactical choice of negating information warfare and minor hit bonuses vs must have magic no see um and LRM breaker for little to no cost?
Pathetic and very telling.

Are you aware of how this topic is structured and what is being discussed? I am talking about equipment utility and what is required for equipment to be useful. You seem to be looking for a fight for no reason.

I will make sure to TK you if I see you out on the battlefield.