Long Range Missile Updates Pts Final Results And Change List
#41
Posted 27 February 2019 - 08:36 PM
#42
Posted 27 February 2019 - 09:05 PM
Its not just like 2.576% random spread change. it's a pretty big deal.
Don't you guys think it should have been... like... F*inG TESTED FIRST?
#43
Posted 27 February 2019 - 09:21 PM
Also PGI: “This will mean that the final direct fire spread of LRM’s will see a 10% buff over the live value, but indirect LRMs will see a 10% nerf over the live value.
But to counterbalance this, we will be providing LRM’s with a 10% velocity boost over the tested PTS values. Across the missile line up, we want LRMs to be the premier “Long Range” option for Missile Hardpoint Weapon systems. And with the overhaul to the Weapon Lock-On system greatly affecting an LRM user’s ability to get indirect locks at long range, we want to ensure that pro-active LRM users that go out and directly engage with the weapon can better compete at longer ranges when using the weapon in direct fire scenarios compared to alternative missile systems.”
Edited by denAirwalkerrr, 27 February 2019 - 09:35 PM.
#44
Posted 27 February 2019 - 09:35 PM
#45
Posted 27 February 2019 - 09:54 PM
Is there a corresponding AMS buff to counter?
Ohh DenAir. that graph is too real!
Edited by Kamikaze Viking, 27 February 2019 - 09:56 PM.
#46
Posted 27 February 2019 - 09:55 PM
#47
Posted 27 February 2019 - 10:41 PM
FupDup, on 27 February 2019 - 08:13 PM, said:
Now that we mention it why doesn't [L]AMS have its max range as 2x optimal like most weapons?
And why can't we shutdown LAMS without shutting down AMS also
flyboy179, on 27 February 2019 - 08:28 PM, said:
Implying anyone actually gives a **** about the comp scene in this game.
Implying anyone gives a **** about your opinion about comp scene in this game.
#48
Posted 27 February 2019 - 11:47 PM
I'm not going to test your stupid game. I'm not going to rebuild my machines. Forget it.
#49
Posted 27 February 2019 - 11:48 PM
#50
Posted 27 February 2019 - 11:57 PM
Also why does LRM 5's still have insane impulse? It's going to get worse and worse now.
#51
Posted 28 February 2019 - 01:07 AM
Edited by Nomad One, 28 February 2019 - 01:33 AM.
#52
Posted 28 February 2019 - 01:18 AM
Edited by puresense, 28 February 2019 - 01:23 AM.
#53
Posted 28 February 2019 - 01:25 AM
Curccu, on 27 February 2019 - 10:41 PM, said:
Implying anyone gives a **** about your opinion about comp scene in this game.
Implying this game is worth playing competitively. You wanna delude yourself this game is mechanically demanding. Go right on ahead
As for me i'm just gonan ***** they didn't test this on the PTS before going ahead with this ****.
Edited by flyboy179, 28 February 2019 - 01:55 AM.
#54
Posted 28 February 2019 - 02:42 AM
flyboy179, on 28 February 2019 - 01:25 AM, said:
Implying this game is worth playing competitively. You wanna delude yourself this game is mechanically demanding. Go right on ahead
People are playing it competitively so it's worth playing clearly and if you have not played it you got no ******* clue what you are talking about.
#55
Posted 28 February 2019 - 03:04 AM
Curccu, on 28 February 2019 - 02:42 AM, said:
Alpha and turn away. Alpha and turn away. maybe the odd stare down dakka build. This game's competative scene is about as exciting as watching paint dry. There's more skill in the TF2 open divisions than this game at the top level half the time.
#56
Posted 28 February 2019 - 03:50 AM
flyboy179, on 28 February 2019 - 03:04 AM, said:
Alpha and turn away. Alpha and turn away. maybe the odd stare down dakka build. This game's competative scene is about as exciting as watching paint dry. There's more skill in the TF2 open divisions than this game at the top level half the time.
Yeah that is not how it is but thanks for proving my point and you were talking about playing not watching, pretty much every e-sport is boring to watch IMO.
And sure 2018 has been bad year for competitive scene as whole game because PGI uses all of it's resources to make MW5 instead of developinh MWO so loads of players have lost interest in this game (and stock MWOWC 2018 didn't help)
and comparing game with (December 2018 stats both) with TOTAL population of <27k vs TF2 PEAK players 116k is kinda silly, specially when other game of those if developed from the beginning to be played competitively.
#57
Posted 28 February 2019 - 04:33 AM
flyboy179, on 28 February 2019 - 01:25 AM, said:
Mechanically demanding enough that you're not overly good at it?
Anyway I made myself ~$1500 playing MWO last year which mean a 2 week O/S trip through the US and Canada. Met some amazing people and had a killer life experience.
Worth it to me for something I do as a hobby.
#58
Posted 28 February 2019 - 05:49 AM
Yes, this is a NERF for most of us.. because most Lurmers don't go much into DF.. it's not the way the weapon system is used in most situations.. and those that do.. play ATMs..
So, for the relative few people that already don't play LRMs like most people, this change is a buff.. and flack the rest of us that play IDF huh?
Again with the vocal LRM hater minority affecting those that just want to play their LRMs and have some fun.
Well.. lemme remind you of one thing.. one UNHOLY thing...
Higher LRM spread means... LIGHTS GET HIT IN THE LEGS.
Edited by Vellron2005, 28 February 2019 - 05:53 AM.
#59
Posted 28 February 2019 - 05:52 AM
Final and radical changes after the last PTS, untested, effectively throwing all the feedback out the window. AGAIN.
Brilliant.
#60
Posted 28 February 2019 - 06:30 AM
I'm not one for conspiracy theories, but I am 90% sure that PGI is trying to slowly kill MWO so it doesn't have to pay for servers/ has to pay for less servers when MW5 comes out.
1 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users