218 replies to this topic

[IshanDeston]

Chris Lowrey, on 17 March 2019 - 09:25 AM, said:

All we can say is that we have used LRM 5 as a base, and have done an extensive tuning pass across the entirety of the missile lineup in order to make it feel much more impactful.

So does that mean IS light LRM boats like the Javelin, which would rely on LRM5 due to its weight restrictions actually become a possibility? I mean i used to quite enjoy my Kintaro with multiple LRM5 launchers and just making it rain, but those pretty much don't stand a chance against the enemy when half the enemy team runs AMS.. And subsequently my tests to run a Javelin LRM5 boat resulted in pretty much the same disappointing results.


And while we are at it.. could we also get some clarification on how LRMs behave without a lock-on, when dumbfired? Do they count as direct LRMs or indirect LRMs? I personally would prefer direct LRMs, as you are 'looking' at something to fire them.

[Chris Lowrey]

Dumbfired LRMs will always count as a "Direct LOS" shot. Since the target (whatever is under your cursor) is naturally within LOS.

This doesn't just count towards the lower arc. It also utilizes the tighter LOS spread as well as any Artemis spread bonus' as well. (since Artemis applies to anything within LOS.)

[Shadowomega1]

Chris so you are saying that the clan LRMs 20 and Clan 15s are getting to see more missiles shot down then before while passing through the max length of an AMS bubble, compared to pre patch?

Also wasn't clan LRMs also getting shot down at a higher rate pre patch then the is lrms of the same size?

[GweNTLeR]

Chris Lowrey, on 17 March 2019 - 09:25 AM, said:

We said that LRM 5's revolve around the current baseline because this is something that can be tested and expressed through people's current understanding of their effectiveness and ability to science. I can save people the trouble of looking through the game files and say that at the farthest end, LRM 20's now have 30% less health then LRM 5 volleys.

Well, that actually sounds pretty nice. I guess changes are not THAT bad after all.

Edited by GweNTLeR, 17 March 2019 - 11:33 AM.

[HammerMaster]

Chris Lowrey, on 17 March 2019 - 09:25 AM, said:

We left this information out for two reasons:

1: The health values are not an exposed value in the UI.
2: Even if we did publish them, it does not give an accurate account of how effective they are in the match. Which can lead to false expectations on how it "should" perform over how it actually performs.

We said that LRM 5's revolve around the current baseline because this is something that can be tested and expressed through people's current understanding of their effectiveness and ability to science. I can save people the trouble of looking through the game files and say that at the farthest end, LRM 20's now have 30% less health then LRM 5 volleys.

The thing is that this does not guarantee 30% more missiles get shot down. AMS is a system that is both random, as well as hyper dependent on positioning. A missile volley traveling the full length of AMS' effective diameter can have more then a 100% increase in effectiveness compared to shooting something at the center of the AMS radius. Likewise, despite identical health pools, stream fire LRMs and ATM's on the Clan side is much more venerable to AMS fire then the clustered volleys of the IS launchers. Along with a number of other x factors including skill tree enhancements, volley speed, etc.

Basically, there is no "one" answer we can give while having it remain accurate due to the number of X factors involved with AMS as a system. All we can say is that we have used LRM 5 as a base, and have done an extensive tuning pass across the entirety of the missile lineup in order to make it feel much more impactful. Especially against larger launcher sizes and non-LRM missile systems. Feel free to give it a try when it goes live and judge for yourselves, but from the PTS user's experience on just the LRM systems alone, they found it very noticeable.

This still doesn't answer my concern now that this health issue is balanced vs the hobgoblin people worry about.
The YUGE tube StuporNova.
Why are we making it harder for people who use REASONABLE loadouts such as a single ALRMx20 or 15. Or even 2xALRM15?
The feeling across the board is you are bringing back the 5xLRM5 rigs back to the field.
WHICH I THOUGHT WE WERE MOVING AWAY FROM!

Edited by HammerMaster, 17 March 2019 - 01:12 PM.

[Lith Dael]

Churzy, on 17 March 2019 - 05:47 AM, said:

The health changes depending on launcher size feel counter-intuitive. Don't get me wrong, I understand and support the intent of the change, but it still doesn't make much sense for missiles to have different health values when they are basically the exact same missiles (same ammo, same damage, etc).

The way I see it, we could assume that shooting down a mass of missiles is easier as you can easily hit another one instead of the intended target. This thinking is not without flaws, I know, but it helps me cope with the issue at least semi-logically ;-)

[xX PUG Xx]

I have only one question (one I know the answer to):

DO YOU ACTUALLY PLAY YOUR OWN GAME?

Seriously, the amount of effort that has went into this and there are so many other things that could have been done.

Step into FP and play on Caustic Valley or Polar Highlands and tell me that LRM's are ineffective or need some re-tuning.

[Hellfire666]

Navid A1, on 16 March 2019 - 11:14 PM, said:

You are giving the TBR-D a streak HSL +1 quirk.

So... if by some unholy reason I want to torture myself in a timber wolf whit a quad streak build I'd generate 3 less heat ?!?!?
Are you even serious?
That THREE extra ghost heat was what holding this chassis back and was worth creating a quirk for?
Is this a joke?

Who even runs a Timber?
Who is concerned about 3 extra heat?

What outcome are you expecting to see?

Why is it so hard to take these quirks seriously.

snap out of it Chris!

You got to buff those no skill lock on weapons! Aiming is to OP and needs to be nerf'd!

[HammerMaster]

Hellfire666, on 17 March 2019 - 02:21 PM, said:

You got to buff those no skill lock on weapons! Aiming is to OP and needs to be nerf'd!

Another AntiLRMFascist.


#LaserJusticeWarrior! (credit to NovaKaine)

Edited by HammerMaster, 17 March 2019 - 02:31 PM.

[theplayerx4734]

Why hasn't lrm impulse (cockpit shake) changed? Why does a dinky little missle shake a enemys cockpit more than a huge AC/20 round?

[General Solo]

The sky is not falling, its just Lerms that are falling

Cant wait to see the new patch

Its not the strongest or smartest that survive, but the most adaptable to change - Darwin

[Sniper09121986]

theplayerx4734, on 17 March 2019 - 03:25 PM, said:

Why hasn't lrm impulse (cockpit shake) changed? Why does a dinky little missle shake a enemys cockpit more than a huge AC/20 round?

Because the AC/20 round is huge only in MWO and only for the IS. In TT there is no relation between caliber and ROF, it is a generic description of a weapon that does 20 damage at a time. And in canon AC's fire in bursts, like Clan ones, and what the IS has is best described as https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Heavy_Rifle

[Aidan Crenshaw]

I find it rather amusing that those vocal folks over here can't agree whether this patch overpowers LRMs and in conclusion will finally kill the game or if it's a nerf to LRMs that will finally kill the game.

[Vellron2005]

If you ask me, other than the lowered arc when LOS firing, these LRM changes feel like a big NERF..

I don't understand this obsession with turning LRMs into ATMs..

The primary role of LRMs is indirect fire, and that is being slowly, but surely, run into the ground..

Will see how LRMs feel after the patch, but let me assure you - those that used IDF primarily, will continue to do so.. and the distinction between good lurmers and bad lurmers will become greater than ever..

I expect even more salt directed at IDF lurmers.. this is sad.

[The6thMessenger]

SneekiBreeki, on 17 March 2019 - 03:46 AM, said:

As i already said, Chris stop sabotaging your employer and driving more players away from the game FFS, stop buffing the most canerous weapon in the entire game already. :U

Well, it's really more of annoying than cancerous, if you're being lurmed then it's your fault. LRMs are already weak enough on their own, and it's the reason why we're getting the dual-arc and homing-system rework which would have buffed individual use, and if anything nerfed IDF use.

That being said, the velocity buff is still stupid though. Pretty god damn stupid, the PTS 2.1 is completely pointless.

[el piromaniaco]

Nobody talk about maps?

[The6thMessenger]

Vellron2005, on 17 March 2019 - 11:56 PM, said:

If you ask me, other than the lowered arc when LOS firing, these LRM changes feel like a big NERF..

It's because it was mostly used as IDF before, and you probably used it in IDF more.

Vellron2005, on 17 March 2019 - 11:56 PM, said:

I don't understand this obsession with turning LRMs into ATMs..

The primary role of LRMs is indirect fire, and that is being slowly, but surely, run into the ground..

Seems like a no-brainer.

It's because LRMs is shat upon for being weak, and it is weak because it has to be weak due to the IDF+homing nature. You can't just buff the weapon on account of individual use, because it will impact group use which is already borderline OP with coordinated teams.

Vellron2005, on 17 March 2019 - 11:56 PM, said:

Will see how LRMs feel after the patch, but let me assure you - those that used IDF primarily, will continue to do so.. and the distinction between good lurmers and bad lurmers will become greater than ever..

I expect even more salt directed at IDF lurmers.. this is sad.

There's an Identity called "IDF Lurmer"? Really, people really hinge their identities on that kind of stuff?

Hows about they just play LRMs both DF and IDF (and mostly DF)? Seems like a no-brainer. If they are still choosing to handicap themselves, when the weapon is already fixed, then maybe it is their fault and they deserve the blame?

el piromaniaco, on 18 March 2019 - 12:27 AM, said:

Nobody talk about maps?

I don't have beef with the old (new) maps, if anything they are welcomed for more variety of experience.

[Cyrilis]

Concerning maps...

Could we also have the old version of Terra Therma back pls? I really liked it!

[MiZia]

Just about what im thinking.
The new arc/lock on will barely impact QP since most of the player that do lrm do it IDF (and will do after patch or do u think they will change mind just cause of it ?).
And this part got a vel buff but a lockon and spread nerf.
On FP and Grp que that may be another story tho.
U prolly will have a own spotter/narcer and there the system will be better than it already is...but tbh isnt it a TEAM based game? So nerf TEAM?

[Bishop Six]

Aidan Crenshaw, on 17 March 2019 - 11:25 PM, said:

I find it rather amusing that those vocal folks over here can't agree whether this patch overpowers LRMs and in conclusion will finally kill the game or if it's a nerf to LRMs that will finally kill the game.

Every patch there are some specialists who know for sure that the game is dead now.

But in reality they are just angry because their own play style is touched and most people are so arrogant that they think the majority is feeling like they feel.

95 % of the people who are ranting just pretend to "fight for mwo and the game balance" but in reality they just want to see their own play style buffed and not liked play styles nerfed.

This behaviour is so bad and intense that Clanners are believing their own lies of broken nerfed Clan mechs and weaponry and because of that they refuse to fight and just sit back with ERPPC and Lurm.

Lurmer are breaking the game mechanics nowadays because they are too much and they are too bad mostly, so that their actions dont help the team.

And when 24 lurmers are out there (or 22 and 2 narcer) it is just the ******* most boring match of all time. If Lurm should be a support weapon, where the hell are the main weapons in a 12 man Lurm team?? It is ******* NOT authentic warfare, its just moorhuhn in crytek engine.