Jump to content

Current State Of Lock-On Missiles = Just Use A Different Weapon Entirely.

LRM ATM Streak

13 replies to this topic

#1 Hiten Bongz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blazing
  • The Blazing
  • 163 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 23 August 2018 - 09:33 PM

The missile changes are so atrociously implemented that it'd be almost hilarious if it didn't affect so many of my mechs so negatively. And I'm not talking about LRMs.

ATMs and Streaks got the most massive usability nerfs when the target of the nerfs was passive LRM boating/play...which of course is barely affected; they just drop Artemis (most LRM boats didn't even use it to begin with) for more tubes and ammo. Meanwhile Streaks and ATMs are just f**cked. Sure, you shouldn't have been able to add Artemis to Streaks (maybe you could just give them a buff then?) or ATMs (because they already have integrated Artemis, which is now useless dead weight added to the launchers being that 2 out of 3 inbuilt bonuses are just deleted).

Tighten locking angle?
I can deal with this, but I would have preferred a smaller change to start with, not "OMG HALF THAT SH!T, YO." Passive LRM boats will just sit farther away and depend on teammates locks even more (read: essentially unaffected) while active Missileers who are sharing armor and being team players just get completely sh!t on for their efforts. Thanks for that.

Remove Artemis lock speed bonus?
Once again, this has no effect on the majority of LRM boats, especially the passive ones. Has a direct and very noticeable negative effect on Streaks and ATMs (maybe we can buff these independently now?). Bye-bye poptarting any missiles, bye-bye peek and volley, bye-bye torso twist and re-lock (the face staring is now a death sentence). Essentially you either stand back behind your team and use their locks from safety as before (LRMs), or stand out in the open staring down your opponent for several seconds before you can fire (ATMs, Streaks). Meanwhile you get focused down, doing zero damage. If they have ECM, well...

Buffing ECM (and LOL, not buffing BAPs)?
Wouldn't be so much of a damn problem except that ya just simultaneously nerfed locking speed and angle, so now it's incredibly annoying/time consuming (to the point of utter stupidity vs. ECM lights) to acquire and especially maintain a lock. Might as well not even try; any other weapon is faster TTK and more efficient, and won't have you staring them down for several seconds at a time while dealing zero damage. I'd rather shoot my AMS at them, if I could. At least I'd be dealing some damage. On to the topic of BAPs, WTF? Ya go and buff the Jesusbox but not the counter? Did you just forget about the damn things, or what? I...I don't even know what to say about this.
Complete. Oversight.

All of this, because PGI logic: don't fix the actual problem, just nerf everything around it.

Edited by Hiten Bongz, 23 August 2018 - 09:33 PM.


#2 S O L A I S

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 390 posts
  • LocationFlorida

Posted 23 August 2018 - 10:18 PM

It's really hard to understand how you equate these changes to a massive loss in usability. Due to CW event I have not used ATM's, but have used IS streaks a lot. Especially yesterday for all day conquest and the lock on angle change was so negligible it probably hasn't been nerfed enough. The old lock on mechanic was waaaay too easy, and biggest complaint against streaks was how effective and effortless it was to wipe out light mechs. This change, making people actually target and track their opponents puts the weapon more on par with other weapons. This is a good thing.

Lock speed bonus should not have been in there in the first place, especially for streaks. The argument that ATM's have it built in and yadda, yadda aside, the weapon should be balanced around it's base stats and not get any bonuses from choosing a drop down that wasn't intended to actually improve it, but did. I have not seen any of the usability from using cover and pop tarting being effected in the way you describe. If these methods were to disappear from usage perhaps you'd have a point, but you are going to still see peeking, popping streaks and atm boats.

Oh and the buffing of ECM... it went from 90 metres to 120 with the express intent of ECM mechs being able to help cover teammates instead of a 'personal cloaking device'. What makes you think that particular change requires a BAP buff? The lock on time trouble you are having with ECM lights is not related to the buff and extra counter distance on your BAP will not help it.

So far these changes seem to be received well by most and no where near as breaking the weapon as you describe.

#3 Hiten Bongz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blazing
  • The Blazing
  • 163 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 23 August 2018 - 11:21 PM

View PostS O L A I S, on 23 August 2018 - 10:18 PM, said:

It's really hard to understand how you equate these changes to a massive loss in usability.


It's really hard for me to understand how you don't equate these changes (increasing lock time 50%, reducing lock angle by 50%) to a massive loss in usability for the lock-on missiles designed for close and medium ranges. For LRMs being shot from long distances? Not much of a difference, no. The farther away from your target, the less you are affected. The closer you get to a fast moving target means a much bigger angle to track, at a faster speed. If you're sitting 1000m away from a target moving 130kph laterally, then sure, you barely have to move your reticle to acquire and maintain lock. It's an entirely different story when you are 150m away from that same 130kph mech; trying to acquire or maintain a lock now requires an order of magnitude more mousing distance (6.6x). The target is moving across your line of sight much faster.

To illustrate (without illustration Posted Image):

It's easy to shoot sk33t (wtf why is this word censored?) targets flying at an angle from you - let's say 90° - when you're standing 275 meters away from the launcher. Now stand 40 meters away from the launcher and try to hit that same sk33t - it's not going to be nearly as easy; it's going to zip right out of your line of sight until you physically turn your entire body to reacquire. At 275m, all you needed to do was shift your arms a bit.

View PostS O L A I S, on 23 August 2018 - 10:18 PM, said:

The old lock on mechanic was waaaay too easy,


I never said it wasn't. I said it would have been preferable to get a smaller adjustment rather than a massive nerf.

Edited by Hiten Bongz, 23 August 2018 - 11:34 PM.


#4 Vellron2005

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blood-Eye
  • The Blood-Eye
  • 4,834 posts
  • LocationIn the mechbay, telling the techs to put extra LRM ammo on.

Posted 23 August 2018 - 11:30 PM

If you wanna talk about the current state of LRMs and lock-on weapons, here's my take:

1) LRMs have gotten much harder to learn to use. If you're targeting a target that is far enough to target but is under ECM, you have to hold your cursor very steady for 5+ seconds, and then when you get a lock, you often loose it as soon as your missiles leave the tubes. This is like trying to shoot a moving locust with a heavy large laser and holding the beam on the same component for the full burn, and then noticing hitreg being wonky and you not doing any damage. It's absurd

2) People who know how to play LRMs will still play them. We will adapt, survive, thrive, regardless. but we won't have s much fun.

3) Artemis nerf means less people will use artemis. Therefore they will invest the tonnage into bigger tube counts and extra ammo. This is direct power-creep, which is bad for the game.

#5 Hiten Bongz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blazing
  • The Blazing
  • 163 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 23 August 2018 - 11:39 PM

View PostVellron2005, on 23 August 2018 - 11:30 PM, said:

3) Artemis nerf means less people will use artemis. Therefore they will invest the tonnage into bigger tube counts and extra ammo. This is direct power-creep, which is bad for the game.


This is a key point to remember. People using LRMs that used Artemis pre-patch will drop the Artemis in favor of more tubes and ammo.

ATMs and Streaks? Big middle finger to them. There are nothing these systems can do to make up for the losses in usability. There is no free extra tonnage available (from stripping Artemis) to dedicate to more tubes, or more ammo.

Just eat your nerfs and go home, dirty missile scrub. Posted Image

View PostVellron2005, on 23 August 2018 - 11:30 PM, said:

If you're targeting a target that is far enough to target but is under ECM, you have to hold your cursor very steady for 5+ seconds, and then when you get a lock, you often loose it as soon as your missiles leave the tubes.

It's absurd


It really is. The amount of time wasted trying to acquire (and reacquire) locks through ECM is just incredibly stupid now. Do I even need to mention the +33% range buff to ECM coverage resulting in more ECM'd mechs being encountered? The huge time waste acquiring/reacquiring locks is also partly due to the angle nerf, of course. It's a double-whammy nerf to Missileers fighting ECM'd targets. Fast ECM lights are now nearly invulnerable to lock-ons unless they are a fair distance away. Unfortunately for ATMs and Streaks that means either very little to zero damage.

"Just use a different weapon." - PGI, 8/21/2018

Edited by Hiten Bongz, 24 August 2018 - 12:05 AM.


#6 Mister Maf

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Ace Of Spades
  • 288 posts
  • LocationAtlanta

Posted 24 August 2018 - 12:45 AM

I'm with OP, for the most part. The increased lock on time hasn't bothered me too much, but in combination with a tightened lock angle it's made it a lot harder to use streaks against lights, which is their main purpose. At the very least I'd like to see the lock angle change reverted.

#7 Gen Lee

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Bad Company
  • 205 posts

Posted 24 August 2018 - 04:46 AM

By the time you get a lock with ATMs now, good players will have already ripped at least one torso off of you. It doesn't matter how much armor you have if you have to expose yourself for too long any time you fire ATMs. You know, I get tired of just running lasers, and here lately, ballistics seem to be having hitreg issues. I shot one stationary guy a mid-range with Gauss Rifle three times yesterday, center mass...and didn't hit a damn thing. He never even knew I was firing at him until I hit him with lasers after the second Gauss shot, and he still didn't move until after I tried firing a third Gauss round at him. Seriously, what the hell is that crap? So I mix it up using different mechs with effective loadouts. ATMs can be really effective, until some developer decides to needlessly nerf them into the ground. Sadly, this probably won't be the last nerf to missiles.

#8 Kalimaster

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • Shredder
  • Shredder
  • 3,273 posts
  • LocationInside the Mech that just fired LRM's at you

Posted 24 August 2018 - 07:18 AM

People have gone back to complaining about ER lasers and Gauss now.

#9 D V Devnull

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • 2,767 posts
  • LocationAnywhere but here, and the lights in my bays are off.

Posted 27 August 2018 - 09:55 AM

@ Topic ---

Agreed in regard to the LRM-Related (and Missile-Related) Changes being way too far into 'jumping the shark' territory. In fact, if some of you haven't put a 'Like' on the following post...

--->>> https://mwomercs.com/forums/topic/268409-patch-notes-141790-21-aug-2018/page__view__findpost__p__6151571

...then you might want to. Sure, there are those of us whose body functions properly and can track targets smoothly. Not to be ignored however are those who have Severe Medical Issues that they'll NEVER recover from, which actively prevent those people from tracking in any non-coarse manner. Frankly, I feel like PGI has potentially committed some sort of 'Accessibility Laws Violation' in particular with how hard they've tightened the Locking Angle on all the Missile Systems. Sure, there should be some skill in tracking targets with Lock-On Weaponry, but I definitely can tell PGI went too far with that change, even to the detriment of keeping MWO alive. MWO's Developers screwing over people with physical inabilities in regard to actually helping a team while they're playing is a rather sad matter. :(



As for this...

View PostKalimaster, on 24 August 2018 - 07:18 AM, said:

People have gone back to complaining about ER lasers and Gauss now.

Heh... you wish... :P



~Mr. D. V. "One can only hope that PGI wakes up and realizes their mistake on these Missile-Related Changes!" Devnull

#10 Sneaky Ohgoorchik

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • Survivor
  • 109 posts

Posted 27 August 2018 - 09:08 PM

Users of lock on missiles are not happy with the current state of things. Their victims are not. Current gamebalance is balanced, right?

#11 D V Devnull

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • The People's Hero
  • 2,767 posts
  • LocationAnywhere but here, and the lights in my bays are off.

Posted 28 August 2018 - 12:23 PM

View PostSneaky Ohgoorchik, on 27 August 2018 - 09:08 PM, said:

Users of lock on missiles are not happy with the current state of things. Their victims are not. Current gamebalance is balanced, right?

It's not balanced when PGI just made the game unplayable for people with Physical and/or Other Medical Disabilities. A whole bunch of people just got shoved out of being able to even use any weapon, and their last option was Lock-On Weaponry like LRMs. Now they can't even do so little as Support a Team, and I think that's not fair. -_-

~Mr. D. V. "Did you forget to read the whole thread and look past your nose?" Devnull

#12 Hiten Bongz

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • The Blazing
  • The Blazing
  • 163 posts
  • LocationTexas

Posted 29 August 2018 - 01:17 AM

View PostSneaky Ohgoorchik, on 27 August 2018 - 09:08 PM, said:

Users of lock on missiles are not happy with the current state of things. Their victims are not. Current gamebalance is balanced, right?


So by your logic PGI should just nerf every weapon in the game "for balance." Because nobody likes getting shot, right?

#13 Humble Dexter

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 503 posts

Posted 09 September 2018 - 04:49 PM

View PostHiten Bongz, on 23 August 2018 - 09:33 PM, said:

The missile changes are so atrociously implemented that it'd be almost hilarious

Before I couldn't use a heavy 6xSSRM6 mech to win a duel against a 4xSRM4 medium Assassin...
Now I can't use a heavy 6xSSR6 to win a duel against a stealth/ecm/ams/whatever light mech armed with machine guns either.
Meaning there is balance now : Streaks have become equally bad against everything.

Not only I agree with your comments, but I'll also point out that the 50% nerf to the targeting radius, has resulted in a 75% nerf to the targeting surface area.

Still waiting for a half-decent nerf to energy weapons (and I don't mean a 75% nerf), and it's the energy weapon alternatives that are getting nerfed this bad instead...

Don't know what game PGI is playing on, but on the one I'm playing you get laughed at for bringing streaks to Solaris, and that was BEFORE they received this massive nerf to the niche role they occupied.

#14 Thorqemada

    Member

  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 5,336 posts

Posted 10 September 2018 - 01:15 PM

Yeah, i have given up on my effort to have a nice diverse fun loadout and switched my LRM+MRM to a MRM+MRM setup.
Its completey waste of effort to try Frontline lurming that is already disadvategous due to min range, facetime, spread, ineffectivity, now insane lock on times if any lock on is possible that is broken a moment later or the LRM volley is completely nulliefied by AMS, Cover, ECM whatever.

You killed small scale + frontline lurming whil not adressing the Issue of backstage Lurm spam from amassed passive playing Supertubecountassaults with nearly unlimited Ammo (more than enough for QP).

Conclusion - this patch fails to achive what you in general stated would be the goal adressing the massive spam of Lurms case and penalizes all atempts to play a different style of Lurming.





1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users