19 replies to this topic

[The6thMessenger]

PTS is about testing LRMs, the hell do you get out of bringing laser-boats, srm-boats and piranhas that will chew on LRMs' back.

Do you expect LRMs to compete well on those, i mean of course them piranhas and srm-boats would chew the LRM users.

[Web Death]

Its also good to test with AMS because some of the changes were mentioning effecting how well an AMS works. Which I have been testing as well as LRM. Though most LRM tests can be done in a Testing GRounds it feels like LOL

Also some people might be bringing builds to see how they recieve being hit by the missles in these changes.

Edited by Web Death, 16 January 2019 - 07:00 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

Web Death, on 16 January 2019 - 06:59 PM, said:

Its also good to test with AMS because some of the changes were mentioning effecting how well an AMS works. Which I have been testing as well as LRM. Though most LRM tests can be done in a Testing GRounds it feels like LOL

Also some people might be bringing builds to see how they recieve being hit by the missles in these changes.

I've been in matches that i am just the LRM user in there. Of course the SRM-Boats and Piranhas are going to chew me.

LRMs not effective in peekaboo-trading? LRMs still not effective against stealth-armor?

*gasp facetiously

The **** are they expecting? it's just an angle change.

Edited by The6thMessenger, 16 January 2019 - 07:58 PM.

[LordNothing]

on one hand its certainly wasting a lot of time. on the other hand it does provide data on a wider range of usage scenarios. lerm boats dont always get optimal conditions for their loadout. so its good to factor that into the analysis.

[The6thMessenger]

LordNothing, on 16 January 2019 - 10:22 PM, said:

on one hand its certainly wasting a lot of time. on the other hand it does provide data on a wider range of usage scenarios. lerm boats dont always get optimal conditions for their loadout. so its good to factor that into the analysis.

Stealth-Gauss, peekaboo-lasers, peekaboo-gauss, SRM-Bombers and Piranhas eat lurm-boats? Even more so with less people around you to give support?

Lower Arc doesn't help versus those, why would that be surprising?

Do they really expect LRMs to compete with those? Perhaps they wanted it, but they need Lock-Time too for LRMs to trade with DF.

[LordNothing]

small numbers of small launchers kind of have issue getting through iron dome builds. maybe cranking up the missile velocity in los mode will help. id like to see 5x5 builds make a comeback, but unless you are using group fire you will never get through concentrated ams. small lanuchers need help.

[The6thMessenger]

LordNothing, on 16 January 2019 - 10:53 PM, said:

small numbers of small launchers kind of have issue getting through iron dome builds. maybe cranking up the missile velocity in los mode will help. id like to see 5x5 builds make a comeback, but unless you are using group fire you will never get through concentrated ams. small lanuchers need help.

My problem with them is that they don't work well with DF weapons, especially lasers. Even when the burn of the lasers are over, im still waiting for the lock to finish.

AMS is supposed to block missiles with their use contingent on LRMs, I hardly see point in adjusting LRMs for AMS, rather AMS should be adjusted for LRMs.

[Dee Eight]

That happens every weapon changes PTS. Trolls gotta troll.

[Siegegun]

LordNothing, on 16 January 2019 - 10:53 PM, said:

small numbers of small launchers kind of have issue getting through iron dome builds. maybe cranking up the missile velocity in los mode will help. id like to see 5x5 builds make a comeback, but unless you are using group fire you will never get through concentrated ams. small lanuchers need help.

I used to play a 5x5 kintaro until all the AMS happened. I would love to play it again. I even own 2 golden boys, have like 10 and a half days in lrm5s, 4.5 million missiles launched.

[LordNothing]

Siegegun, on 16 January 2019 - 11:50 PM, said:

I used to play a 5x5 kintaro until all the AMS happened. I would love to play it again. I even own 2 golden boys, have like 10 and a half days in lrm5s, 4.5 million missiles launched.

tried a 7x5 huntsman and it was terrible. id have to ghost heat my mech to get missiles through the ams screen.

The6thMessenger, on 16 January 2019 - 11:03 PM, said:

My problem with them is that they don't work well with DF weapons, especially lasers. Even when the burn of the lasers are over, im still waiting for the lock to finish.

AMS is supposed to block missiles with their use contingent on LRMs, I hardly see point in adjusting LRMs for AMS, rather AMS should be adjusted for LRMs.

i often completely forgo target lock at closer ranges. its kind of hard to miss. lately ive been using my atms it the same way you would use mrms to great effect.

i think the main issue with ams is the power creep. now that its something you can boat, a single light mech can now nullify 50 tubes. any attempt to manage heat on behalf of the missile boat will result in no damage getting through. the problem isnt ams, its when you have many of them on the enemy's firing line.

i kind of think baseline velocity nerfs on the pts could stand to go away, just dont use them. also make los knock 25% off of the lock time.

Edited by LordNothing, 17 January 2019 - 08:51 AM.

[Siegegun]

The Huntsman makes a terrible LRM mech in my opinion. It would be decent if small tubes worked still... I kow you and 6th seem to think the los lock on needs a buff but I am not so sure. I think it might be too much personally right now. I need to test more builds and mechs, but couldn't get any matches last time I tried. AMS is actually tough to balance, before no one used it, since skill tree then with the LRM buffs they made, theres just more AMS then there used to be. Which I do not think is bad. I think it is a good thing, but it has forced LRM players to go big tube to be effective. I can drive through 3 AMS solo with the builds I play usually now. anything more and I am completely ineffective. It forces me to vulture out to the enemy stragglers to clip them off from the outside of their iron dome. No idea how to make smaller tube builds effective again.

[The6thMessenger]

LordNothing, on 17 January 2019 - 08:38 AM, said:

i often completely forgo target lock at closer ranges. its kind of hard to miss. lately ive been using my atms it the same way you would use mrms to great effect.

Kinda why ATMs work and LRMs doesn't. Point of ATMs is close range, their sweet-spot, but LRMs are far more effective at mid to long ranges (if you can land them).

It's no question that LRM would work at close range without locks, but ATMs work better with it so why aren't you bringing ATMs instead?

LordNothing, on 17 January 2019 - 08:38 AM, said:

i think the main issue with ams is the power creep. now that its something you can boat, a single light mech can now nullify 50 tubes. any attempt to manage heat on behalf of the missile boat will result in no damage getting through. the problem isnt ams, its when you have many of them on the enemy's firing line.

Yep. Dumb implementation, it should have been nullifying a percentage of volley, which means LRM5 would land just as well as LRM20.

LordNothing, on 17 January 2019 - 08:38 AM, said:

i kind of think baseline velocity nerfs on the pts could stand to go away, just dont use them. also make los knock 25% off of the lock time.

I'd rather they give the Lock-time a +50% nerf, but -50% off when in LOS.

[LordNothing]

Siegegun, on 17 January 2019 - 12:32 PM, said:

The Huntsman makes a terrible LRM mech in my opinion. It would be decent if small tubes worked still... I kow you and 6th seem to think the los lock on needs a buff but I am not so sure. I think it might be too much personally right now. I need to test more builds and mechs, but couldn't get any matches last time I tried. AMS is actually tough to balance, before no one used it, since skill tree then with the LRM buffs they made, theres just more AMS then there used to be. Which I do not think is bad. I think it is a good thing, but it has forced LRM players to go big tube to be effective. I can drive through 3 AMS solo with the builds I play usually now. anything more and I am completely ineffective. It forces me to vulture out to the enemy stragglers to clip them off from the outside of their iron dome. No idea how to make smaller tube builds effective again.

i think the problem is that despite the los buff over idf, people just aren't using the los mode. i had a hard time testing it out because much of the team was still lerming the old skool way. and being the only visible mech tends to be bad for ones health. feels like it needs to be better in that mode such that people feel its worth using. it might be better in the live environment as is. more things to shoot at, less chance of getting hit. when the feature gets rolled into the live game i think we would have better data to balance with.

Edited by LordNothing, 17 January 2019 - 03:34 PM.

[LordNothing]

The6thMessenger, on 17 January 2019 - 02:56 PM, said:

Kinda why ATMs work and LRMs doesn't. Point of ATMs is close range, their sweet-spot, but LRMs are far more effective at mid to long ranges (if you can land them).

It's no question that LRM would work at close range without locks, but ATMs work better with it so why aren't you bringing ATMs instead?



Yep. Dumb implementation, it should have been nullifying a percentage of volley, which means LRM5 would land just as well as LRM20.



I'd rather they give the Lock-time a +50% nerf, but -50% off when in LOS.

i also kind of think dumbfired lerms (and probibly atms) need to be handled a little differently. more spread in dumbfire mode. would actually be somewhat useful as an area denial weapon. slightly less spread in idf mode, and lower in los mode. possibly even have a lock quality mechanic where you can fire while the lock is in progress, with spread and tracking speed tied to lock completion. thats nice because i dont like wait to fire mechanics. i am however all for adding more depth to mechanics.

i like the % of volly idea. might be a bit unfair to larger boats though. if each ams unit can take out 20% of a salvo then it would take 5 ams units to completely nullify a salvo, effectively turning an lrm5 into an lrm1 and an lrm50 into an lrm 10 when facing off against a single iron dome piranha. might be a little heavy handed. and dropping it down to 10% per ams might kill off iron domes all together and make people not want to run ams. its quite the pickle.

Edited by LordNothing, 17 January 2019 - 03:48 PM.

[The6thMessenger]

LordNothing, on 17 January 2019 - 03:47 PM, said:

i like the % of volly idea. might be a bit unfair to larger boats though. if each ams unit can take out 20% of a salvo then it would take 5 ams units to completely nullify a salvo, effectively turning an lrm5 into an lrm1 and an lrm50 into an lrm 10 when facing off against a single iron dome piranha. might be a little heavy handed. and dropping it down to 10% per ams might kill off iron domes all together and make people not want to run ams. its quite the pickle.

Then go to 15%, i'm fine with that. 60% to 45% of volley for iron-domes is still no joke.

[The6thMessenger]

LordNothing, on 17 January 2019 - 03:47 PM, said:

i also kind of think dumbfired lerms (and probibly atms) need to be handled a little differently.

I'd rather they just introduced proximity-tracking to missiles, so that near-misses would become hits.

[LordNothing]

The6thMessenger, on 17 January 2019 - 04:40 PM, said:

I'd rather they just introduced proximity-tracking to missiles, so that near-misses would become hits.

or splash damage. a fun mechanic completely absent in this game.

[The6thMessenger]

LordNothing, on 17 January 2019 - 04:47 PM, said:

or splash damage. a fun mechanic completely absent in this game.

Well, it's just damage. But proximity-tracking in which dumb-fired missiles would home at nearby targets, would be functionally be better.

[Siegegun]

The6thMessenger, on 17 January 2019 - 02:56 PM, said:

Kinda why ATMs work and LRMs doesn't. Point of ATMs is close range, their sweet-spot, but LRMs are far more effective at mid to long ranges (if you can land them).

But you are wrong here 6th. LRMs do NOT work better from mid to long ranges. They work better from short to midranges. As I said in another thread, the closer you are the more DPS LRMs do. My fave distance from another target with LRMs is 200-300m. of course I use them often at longer ranges, but I TRY to get as close as possible. Because you kill things faster and more reliably, more of the missiles hit the closer you are as well. Not saying they are better at ATMs at that range, but LRMs themselves are.

LordNothing, on 17 January 2019 - 03:33 PM, said:

i think the problem is that despite the los buff over idf, people just aren't using the los mode. i had a hard time testing it out because much of the team was still lerming the old skool way. and being the only visible mech tends to be bad for ones health. feels like it needs to be better in that mode such that people feel its worth using. it might be better in the live environment as is. more things to shoot at, less chance of getting hit. when the feature gets rolled into the live game i think we would have better data to balance with.

I also noticed this. It would be a lot better in a live environment. I know the more players on the map the better I will do. This is also the reason I hesitate to add any locking buff. If buffs were added to this mechanic and it was on Live, I could do some serious damage with the system. Add to that I have already been double volleying people. Adding lock boost would make that a lot easier to do. I can hear the future salt on that kind of thing. Being hit at the same time from two full volleys of 75+ tubes at close range from one mech is a lot of damage.

[The6thMessenger]

Siegegun, on 18 January 2019 - 03:09 AM, said:

But you are wrong here 6th. LRMs do NOT work better from mid to long ranges. They work better from short to midranges.

Did you not see the "(if you can land them)"? It is used to infer a side-comment for effect, like sneakily adding something but not really.

Do you know how to take things into context? "Far more effective" is is comparative to ATMs.

I mean lets use ATMs at longer ranges instead, what do you get? ATM9 does 9 damage for 7 heat, compare to LRM20 that would do 5.6 heat for 20 damage, 4.6 CD too. Like i said "if you can land them".

English better not be your first (or second) language.