265 replies to this topic

[sycocys]

TAMTAMBABY, on 08 March 2023 - 03:24 PM, said:

sorry artemis

I don't understand what you are trying to point out.

Yes you can put artemis on LRMs, I only run LRMs on one Hunchback which is a dual pack of 10s just splashing around medium lasers it's good for pushing through side torsos from a slightly longer range than the 4sp running srm6/a.

From my understanding, and has been mentioned it makes zero difference if you aren't in line of site with your target. So running one or two 15/20's with artemis "might" gain some benefit if you are achieving your own targeting. Raise you from 30% that hit to 40% or something.

As has been stated multiple times they don't work hardly at all once you clear into pulling tier 3+ matches -unless- you are group dropping with people that narc and tag with you and can focus rain as well as defend or you magically pull a couple players that happen to be doing that style of play for a few matches.

[Ace Selin]

LRM's are too strong!

D A T A, on 03 March 2023 - 10:28 AM, said:

PROPOSAL

Nerf LRM velocity so that slower mechs have more time to travel to their cover, and so that AMS has more time to shoot down incoming missiles.

This is a very good idea !!

[Curccu]

Ace Selin, on 08 March 2023 - 09:37 PM, said:

LRM's are too strong!

This is a very good idea !!

Not sure if trolling but if not... counter proposal: datas beloved Blue non-wubby lazors and bolts (heck lets add gauss to list also) need to achieve similar lock as missiles before being able to fire those weapons accurately, if there is no lock there is constant JJ shake on your crosshair.

[Duke Falcon]

Lockheed_, on 08 March 2023 - 06:42 PM, said:

I can assure you that at higher levels it does not work and yields zero benefits. Also it's a good idea to build good habits when you are still in a lower tier, so as you climb you don't hit a wall and have to basically relearn how to play the game.
"It works in T5" is not a valid point to support any sort discussion about how to use a certain weapon system. In T5 pretty much anything goes anyway.

Yeah, true. I used to used LRMs on most of my mechs because in T5 everythings just works fine. It became boh-rin... Now I run most my IS mechs with MRMs what is moar funny. And also made meh realise 'bout some bad habits to.
Now I use LRMs as supplementary weapon, usually with LLs or PPCs on clan mechs. Not good as weapons, weak on their own end, but could help pin down others in cover thus yer light friends could go wolf-packin' (I bet DATA luvs wolf-packin' to).
On the other hand T5 is a strange place. Things what works against higher T players (e.g. in FP or rarely EQ) usually useless in T5. Total chaos, sumtimez I just stay and think [redacted]. And funny things occur. Not as predictable as an FP siege or domination or wutevah where certain groups use certain tactics all da timez...

Curccu, on 08 March 2023 - 10:00 PM, said:

Not sure if trolling but if not... counter proposal: datas beloved Blue non-wubby lazors and bolts (heck lets add gauss to list also) need to achieve similar lock as missiles before being able to fire those weapons accurately, if there is no lock there is constant JJ shake on your crosshair.

Lore-wise all [redacted] weapons needs locks on target to hit. Otherwise they have a chance to miss even in point-blank range (extreme spread on surface). So, what Curccu said here is valid. But it is not in the games because, well, you could imagine what would happen when everyone may need to spend a second to lock their blue rays (no, not da DVD) upon enemies (hunh, hit those lightz guyz, hit those lightz!)... But this all weapon should have a lock is a valid proposal. Without lock however no JJ shake but more like an X% chance of miss (depends on the weapon n distance) what may still score a lucky shot but rarely. + it helps fer da many "aimbot cheaterz, [redacted]" topics to because many lucky shots without lock-time could indicate certain shady thingz. And no, no skill for reduce lock timez apart from bulky TCs!

And then, mah friendz, noone would complain 'bout already [redacted] LURMs anymoar because everyone would be "cancer aimbots"...

Now, here it goez!

Edited by Ekson Valdez, 09 March 2023 - 06:32 AM.

[BLACKR0SE]

The artemis version that appears there caught my attention, is there a different version on each machine?

Is the spreading level of each machine different?
Or just CLAN and IS different?

[Curccu]

Duke Falcon, on 08 March 2023 - 11:43 PM, said:

But it is not in the games because, well, you could imagine what would happen when everyone may need to spend a second to lock their blue rays (no, not da DVD) upon enemies (hunh, hit those lightz guyz, hit those lightz!)...

PGIs energy draw/information warfare idea/beta actually had something like this if I remember correctly, weapon range was only half of normal without lock or something like that. Lock was just just push E and get target info and you are good to go.

but yeah it wasn't popular idea and didn't happen and normal PGI style they scrapped everything tested in that beta instead of just silly ideas.

Edited by Curccu, 09 March 2023 - 12:06 AM.

[CrimsonPhantom6sg062]

Saved By The Bell, on 08 March 2023 - 07:08 AM, said:

Hey man, but what about learning process? Through pain in low tiers?

To learn what? How to hide behind hills and NASCAR?

Let's face it, too much IDF at low tiers breeds bad habits that really hurt new players once they reach Tier 3. Just look through the older threads in this forum.

Sure hiding behind cover all the time helps avoid IDF and assault snipers. However, at higher tiers nowadays players tend to be quite aggressive at gaining map control. While you are hiding, the enemy especially sniper lights and light wolfpacks would have flanked you from both sides and your rear would get torn up in no time. This is what leads to a lot of stomps in my experience.

At the same time, some players develop a strategy where they run in lower ground or behind cover to try and flank the enemy - mainly snipers and IDF. Yes it works, but good luck getting past a firing line or a semi-decent set-up while the team goes in one by one. This also leads to some one-sided results, not as much as the previous example, but if you watch anyone's replays - you can see that such behavior often leads to one side losing 4 to 5 mechs within 40 to 50 seconds.*1

These are but a few examples of what lots of IDF does in lower tiers. As I said, lrms mainly strangle map control and punish overextension and this can be intimidating for new or weaker players. All I would recommend is making it so IDF builds still exist in low tiers, but in scarcer numbers.


Even if you completely remove IDF from the lower tiers, would newer players not still have a chance to learn how to use cover and learn timings + patience when faced with builds such as dakka, gaussvom, or RAC+SPL? Trust me, even without IDF you aren't going to last long in any mech running in the open.


*1 This can happen either to the flankers or the players bringing up the rear, or even both at the same time. This has nothing to do with tonnage differences between say a light and an assault, but moreso differences in roles. Put it this way: If the snipers and the knife-fighters DON'T work in tandem, you are going to have a bad time at either one or both ends.

Edited by CrimsonPhantom6sg062, 09 March 2023 - 12:37 AM.

[sycocys]

Curccu, on 08 March 2023 - 10:00 PM, said:

Not sure if trolling but if not... counter proposal: datas beloved Blue non-wubby lazors and bolts (heck lets add gauss to list also) need to achieve similar lock as missiles before being able to fire those weapons accurately, if there is no lock there is constant JJ shake on your crosshair.

Counter to your counter proposal - make the long range weapons ((h)LL, erLL/erML(maybe there's mechs that poke out well into the 1k range), guass, maybe the ac/2 and slightly 5s) have a minimum effective range.

Make "skills" occupy a crit slot per tree, consumables one per use and be crit-able. <- this would mitigate a lot of nonsense that throws a wrench into unbalancing systems.

Both are something that PGI could actually do, and it creates a direct counter/downside for boating long range gear - and boating at all really.

TAMTAMBABY, on 08 March 2023 - 11:43 PM, said:

The artemis version that appears there caught my attention, is there a different version on each machine?

Is the spreading level of each machine different?
Or just CLAN and IS different?

Spread level is adjusted via quirks on many mechs. If a quirk isn't present to make the change its IS vs Clan versions.

Once you are out past about 400m the travel time is just too long for them to get to targets unless you are shooting through your teammates backs once you get slightly higher in matching.
It works for a mech like the HBK-4J because of the over quirking, plus your primary weapon system operates at around 300 meters. You are engaging with your target in line of sight at brawling distance, bap + target decay help you keep them locked while kiting around terrain.

[sycocys]

Curccu, on 09 March 2023 - 12:04 AM, said:

PGIs energy draw/information warfare idea/beta actually had something like this if I remember correctly, weapon range was only half of normal without lock or something like that. Lock was just just push E and get target info and you are good to go.

but yeah it wasn't popular idea and didn't happen and normal PGI style they scrapped everything tested in that beta instead of just silly ideas.

That was their -energy draw- mixed in there? I remember that one, it had some promise not well thought out though.

Would have been much better if they went with energy bar + added c3 systems for targeting sharing. Could have even added different levels of sensor systems to change up how far you could individually target - and changed over ecm to an information denial/longer lock system.

Have to say, I did prefer it over the auto pinpoint anything that popped up red, heck their idea would have been better if they just made it so convergence required some sort of line of sight lock. (it was pre-stealth)

[Knownswift]

I thought OP rage quit the game and became an amateur body builder.

Either way, dude deserved a perma that year he got his whole *** team thrown out of worlds.

[LordNothing]

Curccu, on 08 March 2023 - 10:00 PM, said:

Not sure if trolling but if not... counter proposal: datas beloved Blue non-wubby lazors and bolts (heck lets add gauss to list also) need to achieve similar lock as missiles before being able to fire those weapons accurately, if there is no lock there is constant JJ shake on your crosshair.

nah, nerf erlls close range performance, long range performance can stay. do something like this where you have a linear taper from a starting damage up to full damage at some percentage of optimal range. damage buffs can be applied at the lower end to make up for the added difficulty of having to bracket your target.

Laser	0m Damage	Full Damage At	Damage
erll	55.00%	55% Optimal	Same
erml	65.00%	45% Optimal	Small Buff
ersl	75.00%	35% Optimal	Medium Buff
cerll	50.00%	60% Optimal	Same
cerml	60.00%	50% Optimal	Same
cersl	70.00%	40% Optimal	Small Buff
cerul	80.00%	30% Optimal	Buff

and curse your forum software for making it hard to paste tables and still not come out right.

[feeWAIVER]

LordNothing, on 09 March 2023 - 11:05 AM, said:

nah, nerf erlls close range performance, long range performance can stay. do something like this where you have a linear taper from a starting damage up to full damage at some percentage of optimal range. damage buffs can be applied at the lower end to make up for the added difficulty of having to bracket your target.

.

ErLL already underperforms in close range against close range weapons.

[LordNothing]

feeWAIVER, on 09 March 2023 - 11:12 AM, said:

ErLL already underperforms in close range against close range weapons.

not enough really. erll boats do make terrible brawlers but it should go beyond that. i mean if were talking a super meta erll boat that can wave off ghost heat on 4-6 beams, thats still enough to leg a squirrel. and squirrels should really be for punishing players that plant roots at the edge of the map.

numbers are of course negotiable. and i wouldnt be against the small and micro lasers remain as is for simplicity and since the gains they net you are not really that significant. an ermicro is still a knife fighting weapon.

but this is the way lasers actually work. contrary to popular beliefe a laser is not a beam so much as a very long cone. for range you need a wide aperature to project the focal point out at distance. lets say the lasers in battletech have adaptive optics and rangefinders to set the focal point at the distance of a target (laser weapons need to have this). lets say for simplicity that this mechanism is instantaneous and requires no pilot intervention to operate.

the er laser with the wide aperture as a result has to sacrifice some range of focal control. you could have it but it increases the length of the optics and thus the size of the weapon. since the is erll has twice the size of the clan model, it gets a bit more range of focal control. non-er lasers have narrow apertures and its easier to keep the beam collimated, you dont need as much focal control and thus you can hit targets with the same damage the whole length. where as standing close to a wide aperture you would get hit with a more diffuse circle of light and not a point, which is how you concentrate damage.

Edited by LordNothing, 09 March 2023 - 11:51 AM.

[Knownswift]

IMO, the issue with blue lasers is that we keep treating them like a sniper rifle, when they're actually more like a burst fire machine gun.

Suppression is huge in game right now, which is why I don't play much anymore.

[Knownswift]

I don't really like shooting at dots. So.. not sure how I benefitted.

[Knownswift]

I'm not in the secretive order of the echo-pot, so like you I too have no impact on balance.

[Krucilatoz]

hypographia, on 06 March 2023 - 03:50 PM, said:

LRMS are fine if you factor in true ROI.

--a lil cut

At the end of the day, if a weapon tech requires:

• a secondary support mech dedicated to making sure your ammo hits the target
  
• ideal map RNG via chance or multiple map-passes to get your voting power up
  
• lack of skill in the opposing team
  
• lack of ECM
  
• lack of cover
  
• lack of radar derp
  
• lack of AMS

I can't see how that is OP.

Thank you for talking sense

And, in my opinion, LRM is the best counter for sniper-camper, as annoying as it can be lol.

Edit :
looking at my own stat, artemis did have positive effect but with difference for IS and clan, where for clan it only add 5% accuracy from 35%ish to 40%ish.
For IS LRM it can boost from 31% to 40%ish (LRM-15), and to 47% for LRM-20A.

Edited by Krucilatoz, 09 March 2023 - 07:57 PM.

[CrimsonPhantom6sg062]

This might be off-topic but this context intrigues me:

the check engine light, on 09 March 2023 - 02:43 PM, said:

People at your level of play have done nothing but benefit from it.

Take your W while the servers are still on.

the check engine light, on 09 March 2023 - 03:14 PM, said:

Well, I am sure your distaste for this state of affairs will be what finally turns the tide, then.

Because it sure as **** isn't MINE.

the check engine light, on 09 March 2023 - 04:35 PM, said:

And OP is, and does.

Doesn't that just fill everyone with the utmost confidence that things will get better? Like a ******* rainbow on a rainy day, I tell you.

the check engine light, on 09 March 2023 - 04:42 PM, said:

Makes you wonder what kind of people would take him aboard in the first place.

By Any Other Name/ the check engine light, can you for once show some restraint in your aggression in the forums?

I have already warned you about this in a private message since 14th December 2022 11:14 AM. You have been constructive since the first time we have met, but over the last 2 months you have:

1. Repeatedly insulted multiple players across a variety of player subsets, sometimes spanning multiple pages on a thread, sometimes without any incitement.
2. Repeatedly trashed MWO's qualities as a game without constructive debate.
3. Rubbished every MWO community members' efforts to maintain a constructive discussion over improving the game, or making feature suggestions.
4. Added virtually nothing constructive as of recent - e.g. Domination game mode should look more like Epicenter game mode in World of Warships. I think Laservom is underperforming, etc. All your recent comments over the past few months contained nothing but negativity and BM.
5. Changed your name and removed all posts you could remove related to your old name, I am guessing to avoid responsibility for your past actions.


I would normally stay quiet and I would normally let a name change go, since some people do it to erase a past that they detest, so to speak (i.e. I have no intention to name-and-shame).

However, I am 100% positive you did this and more to avoid responsibility, so I am calling you out publicly on it. I am not letting ANYONE get away freely with bad behavior.

Furthermore, I personally think you are taking your negativity too far in the forums and seeing the fights break out on the forums is really irritating me. You can give criticism and comments related to others' discussions, but don't spew vile hatred on others.

I have no ill intentions - I cannot be bothered to waste my time over meaningless internet arguments. But for your sake, all I ask is for you to think before you speak:

What exactly did you add to the discussion with the 4 aforementioned quotes I bought up?


You don't have to take my suggestions, of course. Feel free to continue insulting everyone on MWO and bearing the consequences later. Nonetheless, I do not see what you would gain from your negative actions.



P.S. I want to make it clear that in my post #90, I do realise Saved By The Bell might be being sarcastic, but I think it is a good point to make regarding LRMs.

[CrimsonPhantom6sg062]

the check engine light, on 10 March 2023 - 12:29 AM, said:

I'm incredulous that the Cauldron even took him aboard. They hardly need the controversy.

Regarding the name change? It wasn't one of you I was hiding from, but thanks for making someone else's search a bit easier. I'm sure they'll thank you profusely. I may dislike and distrust most of you, possibly hate some of your guts, but I don't think you're stupid.

I used to doubt D A T A as well, but after I learned the game a bit - I sort of understand some of his points. For example, I now get why he says most people he meets in QP don't really understand how games flow in MWO, but I try to respond with constructive advice. I do not agree with everything he says, and his communication outside the game may not be the best, but he has lots of experience in MWO since 2013.

No one should listen to him like gospel, but it is worth considering his viewpoints precisely because he has put in tons of effort to learn the game.


As for your hatred, I know for a fact you hate most here but you should honestly let it go. Holding onto such hate and acting out on it does no good for anybody. I am not saying it is easy, but what do you achieve from acting so baleful?

If you find it too hard to not hit back at other people in the forums, maybe you should just take it easier and just play MWO for what it is. Just ignore all the negativity in MWO and focus on what you enjoy. Maybe even take a break completely if it causes too much stress or you genuinely find absolutely no enjoyment.


You can post suggestions and criticism, but you do not have to necessarily respond to disagreements and rejections regardless of intonation:

When I play my ERPPC Adder, I sometimes get toxic comments about "rotating", "leaving someone to die", or "wasting time" even though I am just trying to fight for map control and rangefinding at a distance of roughly 600 to 1000m where my mech works best.

Nowadays, I do not respond with "let's see you do better" or "1v1 my Oxide" even post-game*1, I just ignore the comments and maybe type "gg wp" if I think the game is a good game.

I believe I have also learned to mind other people's business. I make mid-game comments about other players' big errors, but if they respond negatively I just shut up. No point in stirring up trouble. In my mind, it just hurts my in-game performance.


*1 I stopped caring about individual performances in individual games. Anyone can have a good or a bad day at the office. I am not perfect, but at least typing this will help focus myself on trying to become a better person.


Edited: You do not have to have faith in the community's efforts to foster constructive development in the game, but that does not mean you have to comment negatively on it. You can voice suspicions or disagreement, but making snarky comments without substance only nurtures more hatred - this achieves nothing good. For example, I would have had no issue if you said D A T A is biased against LRMs, I don't think OP's suggestion is a good idea, or I think Cauldron's changes were useless or bad.

Edited by CrimsonPhantom6sg062, 10 March 2023 - 01:31 AM.

[sosegado]

the check engine light, on 10 March 2023 - 01:51 AM, said:

I don't think LRMs are even remotely a concern for him at his level of play.

I was under the impression that DATA was part of the cauldron, or at least a voice they considered worthy of listening to?

Under that impression I thought it was part of the Cauldrons (self assumed?) duties to monitor the game at all Tiers of play in order to ensure that the gameplay was well balanced.

That's why it comes as no surprise to me that he, or any member of the Cauldron could have alts at all Tiers in order to monitor how their changes were impacting everyone at all Tiers.

Is this not the case?

Edited by Stab Wound, 10 March 2023 - 07:29 AM.