65 replies to this topic

[KursedVixen]

Hazeclaw, on 27 March 2019 - 12:57 PM, said:

Seriously stop.

IDF lrms got nerfed, DF lrms got buffed

overall IDF is still the same bs mechanic it was, you can still hide behind hills and shoot enemies that are fighting your teammates, it just isn't quite as effective now, and ECM and AMS actually do stuff. But oh joy now you have the option to go direct and do more

sorry to all the "support, hold locks" guys your damage buttons got hurt a little, you can still do it same as before, just now if people use the specific counters (by making their mechs less effective against direct fire mechs) you actually have to look at what you're doing and look for other targets, not just point circle in general direction of any red box and erase mechs boasting high damage at the end of the drop

team based drops with narc/lrm combos are as ridiculous as they ever were

How did the patch effect ECM?

[Mystere]

Hazeclaw, on 28 March 2019 - 01:13 PM, said:

because they can still be fired IDF and not that many enemies actually have ams and/or ecm? no other weapon in the game lets you shoot at stuff you can't actually see

You might be fine with IDF. However, based on his tone and jibe, the person I am replying to seems to want people to use Long Range Missiles at 300-400m as a direct fire weapon only.

Context.

The person I am replying to can always clarify his post to remove any misinterpretations that may result. <shrugs>

Edited by Mystere, 28 March 2019 - 01:28 PM.

[JediPanther]

Bush Hopper, on 28 March 2019 - 07:38 AM, said:

And exactly this is the problem: Indirect fire

It pisses people off that potatoes which get caught out of position get help or that clever flanking gets punished by a lurmer sitting half a map away with tons of obstacles between it and its target. It makes for static gameplay as well

Secondly, I absolutely HATE it to have missile assaults sitting in the back not sharing armour or doing anything.


Also for the folk: Missiles were direct firing missiles in Battletech and sucked royally fired indirectly and still needed a dedictaed spotter or a C3 system.

In my book the direct fire part should be improved and the indirect fire part as well UNDER THE CONDITION that indirect fire is only accessible via TAG or NARC etc

Too bad there are mechs with only missiles and making that condition would make that mech useless. If the rule of 3 to master a mech was still in effect without those other variants with more than one hard point type you'd royally piss off players to the point of rage quitting when they suddenly find they blew most if not all their space bucks on a now useless mech such as http://CPLT-A1 Stock

Pretty hard to find matches when a poor game design decision like your idea could cost a lot of players. Not everyone has the time to group up or to do a 20-50 minute fw. Some people really have only so much time for video games.

[Prototelis]

Vellron2005, on 28 March 2019 - 01:31 AM, said:

Yes, IDF was nerfed and DF was buffed..

That was the point.

Quote

The problem is that most lurmers play IDF LRMs - so, most of us got NERFED, not buffed.

Most auto aimers do not play backfield. Most ASSAULT auto aimers play extreme backfield and actively drive losses. Any time you are the last mech alive, an assault, and above 85% you absolutely drove that loss regardless of how much damage, kills, KMDDs, solos you may have accumulated.

IDF got nerfed, DF got buffed. That was the point.

Quote

And most IDF Lurmers aren't going to become DF lurmers, especially not over night, just cose' we got nerfed.. If we wanted to play DF missiles, we would play MRM or ATM..

People who play poptart moved onto other combos that aren't PPC+gauss. You can move onto not being a toxic clown.

Quote

So guess what? Yall' wanted more effective LRMs? You got less effecitve LRMs, more second liners and people not sharing armor.

Congrats.

I'd tell you to go play some coordinated matches but most people won't have you because of your toxic attitude. LRMs are very strong in FP unless the other team comes prepared. Since you can't reliably tell who you will be facing that doesn't occur often.

Second liners are sharding armor. Extreme backfielders are not.

[Vellron2005]

JediPanther, on 28 March 2019 - 01:38 PM, said:

Too bad there are mechs with only missiles and making that condition would make that mech useless. If the rule of 3 to master a mech was still in effect without those other variants with more than one hard point type you'd royally piss off players to the point of rage quitting when they suddenly find they blew most if not all their space bucks on a now useless mech such as http://CPLT-A1 Stock

Pretty hard to find matches when a poor game design decision like your idea could cost a lot of players. Not everyone has the time to group up or to do a 20-50 minute fw. Some people really have only so much time for video games.

I agree with you on your point, but personally, I'm starting to feel that people just simply don't want IDF to be a thing at all..

As soon as it's mentioned, in any shape, line or context, out comes the toxicity, name calling, personal attacks and statistics checking.. and nobody cares about what is said, but only about how to discredit, slur and make the person saying it feel small..

It seems that some players simply don't want a dynamic, realistic battlefield, but instead want COD with mechs..

TBH I'm getting tired of fighting this fight..

LRMs have only gotten from good, to bad, and from bad to worse, and PGI seems to be taking direction from the haters..

Where it will all end up, I don't know.. but I know this game is going to be worse, and less fun for it.. And that inevitably leads to longer wait times as players dwindle and bleed out of the game yet again..

I hope the last 24 people have fun face-punching eachother with SRMs playing rock-em-sock-em robits..

[thievingCLAGpie]

Vellron2005, on 29 March 2019 - 06:38 AM, said:

I agree with you on your point, but personally, I'm starting to feel that people just simply don't want IDF to be a thing at all..

No, they just realize how its implementation has a negative effect on gameplay.

Vellron2005, on 29 March 2019 - 06:38 AM, said:

It seems that some players simply don't want a dynamic,

There is nothing dynamic about lrms.

Vellron2005, on 29 March 2019 - 06:38 AM, said:

realistic battlefield,

There is nothing realistic about 100 ton mech combat.

Vellron2005, on 29 March 2019 - 06:38 AM, said:

but instead want COD with mechs..

COD doesn't have brawling, doesn't have mid-long range trading, doesn't have a mechlab....

Vellron2005, on 29 March 2019 - 06:38 AM, said:

LRMs have only gotten from good, to bad, and from bad to worse, and PGI seems to be taking direction from the haters..

You mean by multiple patches in a row buffing them?

Edited by thievingCLAGpie, 29 March 2019 - 08:15 AM.

[HammerMaster]

thievingCLAGpie, on 29 March 2019 - 08:14 AM, said:

No, they just realize how its implementation has a negative effect on gameplay.




There is nothing dynamic about lrms.



There is nothing realistic about 100 ton mech combat.




COD doesn't have brawling, doesn't have mid-long range trading, doesn't have a mechlab....




You mean by multiple patches in a row buffing them?

Just another denier.
A newly created one at that.

[thievingCLAGpie]

HammerMaster, on 29 March 2019 - 08:38 AM, said:

Just another denier.
A newly created one at that.

[HammerMaster]

thievingCLAGpie, on 29 March 2019 - 08:44 AM, said:

"Member Since Yesterday, 09:03 PM"
WHO COULD IT BE?

[Prototelis]

I think thats pretty obvious, even for someone who can't see stealth mechs standing still in front of him.

Oh wait.

Edit; FWIW alt-posting is against the rules.

Edited by Prototelis, 29 March 2019 - 09:18 AM.

[thievingCLAGpie]

Greetings Mechwarrior it's the Beef speaking.

[Bud Crue]

HammerMaster, on 29 March 2019 - 08:38 AM, said:

Just another denier.
A newly created one at that.

Just as a matter of record over the last year:

April 2018 - LRM velocity upped from 160 to 190. (Buff)

July 2018 - LRM launchers heat reduced from .6-.2 depending on size. (Buff)
Clan spread was increased. (Nerf)

August 2018 - LRM lock assistance cone (angle) tightened by 50% (Nerf)
Artemis nerf, ECM rang buff to 120, Narc cooldown increased by 50%. (All arguably nerfs)

October 2018 - Heat changes, namely dissipation increases (Buff to all but disproportionately so to LRM)
ECM changes to Artemis directed at SRMs (not relevant to LRMs) but Artemis spread bonus increased to 30% (Buff)

March 2019 -LRM velocity increased another 30. (Buff)
LOS lock time reduced 20%. (Buff)
IDF lock time dependent on range (Nerf)
IDF spread increased 20% (Nerf)

—-

So while I don’t deny that there have been some nerfs over the last year, there have also been some pretty clear buffs, especially in terms of the all important LRM velocity. The heat decreases and then subsequent increases are a wash with a net benefit provided by the dispation improvements that we all enjoy. Artemis changes I think are just as impactful to SRMs as they are to LRMs (perhaps more so as applied to SRM6 builds). So yeah, overall I think LRMs have been buffed more than nerfed, and certainly buffed more than any other class of weapons.

[HammerMaster]

Bud Crue, on 29 March 2019 - 09:18 AM, said:

Just as a matter of record over the last year:

April 2018 - LRM velocity upped from 160 to 190. (Buff)

July 2018 - LRM launchers heat reduced from .6-.2 depending on size. (Buff)
Clan spread was increased. (Nerf)

August 2018 - LRM lock assistance cone (angle) tightened by 50% (Nerf)
Artemis nerf, ECM rang buff to 120, Narc cooldown increased by 50%. (All arguably nerfs)

October 2018 - Heat changes, namely dissipation increases (Buff to all but disproportionately so to LRM)
ECM changes to Artemis directed at SRMs (not relevant to LRMs) but Artemis spread bonus increased to 30% (Buff)

March 2019 -LRM velocity increased another 30. (Buff)
LOS lock time reduced 20%. (Buff)
IDF lock time dependent on range (Nerf)
IDF spread increased 20% (Nerf)

—-

So while I don’t deny that there have been some nerfs over the last year, there have also been some pretty clear buffs, especially in terms of the all important LRM velocity. The heat decreases and then subsequent increases are a wash with a net benefit provided by the dispation improvements that we all enjoy. Artemis changes I think are just as impactful to SRMs as they are to LRMs (perhaps more so as applied to SRM6 builds). So yeah, overall I think LRMs have been buffed more than nerfed, and certainly buffed more than any other class of weapons.

That's all well and good but.
You can count the times they were diggled with.
What it doesn't account for is the fact FP DropDeck crews Annihilated people.
That in QP its situational.
That EVEN THOUGH THEY FINALLY made in LOS better, It's situational as ever due to AMS buff and its current up proliferation.

Prototelis, on 29 March 2019 - 09:18 AM, said:

I think thats pretty obvious, even for someone who can't see stealth mechs standing still in front of him.

Oh wait.

Edit; FWIW alt-posting is against the rules.

Name all the people that can't see a stealth mech.
Saying that I can't is a dig that is blind in of itself.

[K O Z A K]

In QP many things are situational because you only know the map after you picked the mech. LBX20 srm6 brawlers are situational on ranged maps, and ERLL mechs are situational on brawl maps. Should we balance srm6 by it's performance on polar and erll by performance on mining?

[HammerMaster]

Hazeclaw, on 29 March 2019 - 09:43 AM, said:

In QP many things are situational because you only know the map after you picked the mech. LBX20 srm6 brawlers are situational on ranged maps, and ERLL mechs are situational on brawl maps. Should we balance srm6 by it's performance on polar and erll by performance on mining?

I don't know why your arguing and defending your stance.
You should be jumping for joy how much you hate LRM.
Bring AMS, autocannon to your hearts content.

[Mystere]

Vellron2005, on 29 March 2019 - 06:38 AM, said:

I agree with you on your point, but personally, I'm starting to feel that people just simply don't want IDF to be a thing at all..

That is the one very undeniable fact obvious in most if not all LRM "discussions". Whatever some of those people say is merely just "cover".

thievingCLAGpie, on 29 March 2019 - 08:14 AM, said:

No, they just realize how its implementation has a negative effect on gameplay.

So, who else here wants direct-fired LRMs to be just as deadly as the deadliest weapons in MWO, especially given all it's current drawbacks and counters? <shrugs>

Edited by Mystere, 29 March 2019 - 10:36 AM.

[JediPanther]

Vellron2005, on 29 March 2019 - 06:38 AM, said:

I agree with you on your point, but personally, I'm starting to feel that people just simply don't want IDF to be a thing at all..

As soon as it's mentioned, in any shape, line or context, out comes the toxicity, name calling, personal attacks and statistics checking.. and nobody cares about what is said, but only about how to discredit, slur and make the person saying it feel small..

It seems that some players simply don't want a dynamic, realistic battlefield, but instead want COD with mechs..

TBH I'm getting tired of fighting this fight..

LRMs have only gotten from good, to bad, and from bad to worse, and PGI seems to be taking direction from the haters..

Where it will all end up, I don't know.. but I know this game is going to be worse, and less fun for it.. And that inevitably leads to longer wait times as players dwindle and bleed out of the game yet again..

I hope the last 24 people have fun face-punching eachother with SRMs playing rock-em-sock-em robits..

I am the same. Those types are the ones pgi listens to instead of ones who want and desire the dynamic game play which the game has been loosing for years. No other weapon at all has the counters,hate and toxicity in the game's history.

If it were not for lrms I'd never have gotten into the game and spent a few years in a unit having fun as a second line fire support. Once all the nerfs to lrms and how it functions started I mostly abandoned lrms to my troll-or-fun only weapon moving on to light mech which I quickly found I'm very skilled in then that damed rescale ruined the light mech class for me.

I'll keep fighting for lrms and using them because without that I'd never have had those years of fun playing in a unit or enjoying the game. One thing is for sure I find myself enjoying the game less and less because of all the "toxicity, name calling, personal attacks and statistics checking.. and nobody cares about what is said, but only about how to discredit, slur and make the person saying it feel small.."

When a person can make and has posted a thread of removing one of the three core weapon systems in the game while actively encouraging the hate and bigotry against people who want to use that system I begin to care less and less. Exactly when did "You use lrms on a mech! That makes you a lrm-er! "You're a lrmer!" become something akin to na zee hate against other players acceptable?

I don't care really if mwo crashes and burns after mw5 launches. There are still other giant robot games. Pgi and MS don't have a monopoly of that gene.https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3u_CdEy7oMY

[thievingCLAGpie]

Mystere, on 29 March 2019 - 10:32 AM, said:

So, who else here wants direct-fired LRMs to be just as deadly as the deadliest weapons in MWO, especially given all it's current drawbacks and counters? <shrugs>

certainly not me

[Mystere]

JediPanther, on 29 March 2019 - 10:37 AM, said:

I don't care really if mwo crashes and burns after mw5 launches ...

You just might get your wish, and more^(*).

(*) MW5 crashes and burns as well.

[K O Z A K]

HammerMaster, on 29 March 2019 - 09:51 AM, said:

I don't know why your arguing and defending your stance.
You should be jumping for joy how much you hate LRM.
Bring AMS, autocannon to your hearts content.

I don't hate anything

because I enjoy various playstyles in this game, and like to see some resemblance of balance between them so nothing becomes obscenely good or easy compared to everything else

as such I call out misinformation and half truths from people that generally play only one thing and constantly argue for it being stronger to see their personal scores improve, even to the detriment of the community as a whole