356 replies to this topic

[dario03]

Tarteso, on 09 January 2024 - 03:49 PM, said:

I guess that we'll see in a few weeks if they make the game "better" or if we just get a quite predictable major LRM nerf that anyone with a brain can expect, on the basis of prior experiences.
For example, their 1% per node raderp nerf, allegedly to make missiles more viable (lol). For example, maps reworks, like Polar or planting shitloads of metal mushrooms in Steiner Colloseum. For example, the lastest map is a cave. For example, the lastest velocity nerf because ... reasons. For example, the recent ECM range reduction that changed actually nothing for the usability of guided missiles.

1% dep nerf was only to cut back on losing locks because a mech crossed behind something like a pole or rock for a split second. Was never intended as a major balance change.
And cauldron has little to do with map design.

[Tarteso]

dario03, on 09 January 2024 - 05:34 PM, said:

1% dep nerf was only to cut back on losing locks because a mech crossed behind something like a pole or rock for a split second. Was never intended as a major balance change.
And cauldron has little to do with map design.

95% raderp leaves 0.29 s + spotting time (if any) to lock in LOS if you equip 100% target decay, which is far less than you need just to start moving your reticle over the target. So, pointless change.

And, yeah! all the anti-lurming map design was coincidence.

Edited by Tarteso, 09 January 2024 - 05:51 PM.

[Tarteso]

Heavy Money, on 09 January 2024 - 04:11 PM, said:

They will be more consistent because locks will last longer, and because 100% radar dep mechs won't instantly break locks. Losing some velo is a fair price to pay for that.

LRMs miss when 1) People get cover physically blocking them or 2) The lock breaks and they target is moving. Making radar dep weaker will make locks last longer, which means #2 has less impact. Reducing velo compensates for this by giving them more time to break the lock or get cover. So that's a zero sum change on its own (depending on how much dep and velo are changed, of course.)

Currently, it is very frustrating to be playing against fast mechs with 100% dep and lose your lock because they ran behind a pebble for a fraction of a second. 100% dep causes that. Even if its changed to just 90%, then it will cause split second blips to not break locks. That's a huge deal and worth losing some velo for.

Less velo makes almost no difference when shooting at exposed targets, especially if you have your own LOS to it. They may even only reduce velo on indirect fire, which would make this an indirect buff to direct fire (which nobody is complaining about. All the issues with LRMs being oppressive come from the indirect fire.)

So overall, having 100% dep not be possible makes a huge difference to quality of life and ease of use, especially against small fast moving targets. Losing some velo makes almost no difference against optimal targets like slow assaults in the open, and should balance out in other situations.

Of course, all of this depends on what the changed amounts of each actually are.

All the oppressive thing (lurmaggedons?) about indirect fire comes from group coordinated tactics. So, the question is: are they going to "balance" missiles around the idea of "3 LRM90 mechs assisted by a narc light in every match"?

[Heavy Money]

Tarteso, on 09 January 2024 - 05:49 PM, said:

95% raderp leaves 0.29 s + spotting time (if any) to lock in LOS if you equip 100% target decay, which is far less than you need just to start moving your reticle over the target. So, pointless change.

Its a huge change in that it means locks don't break if your aimer is on target and a light runs behind a lamp post. It is a change that fixes this one specific issue, which is a significant one.

Tarteso, on 09 January 2024 - 05:59 PM, said:

All the oppressive thing (lurmaggedons?) about indirect fire comes from group coordinated tactics. So, the question is: are they going to "balance" missiles around the idea of "3 LRM90 mechs assisted by a narc light in every match"?

What happens if they don't and then people play that? Or just multiple LRM boats end up on the same team that aren't grouped? And if this becomes possible, then there's a huge incentive for people to play it. Which is exactly what happened the other times LRMs nearly destroyed the game.

Are you suggesting that we just ignore the possibility of multiple LRM boats being on the same team and trust to players to just be honorable and not play that? lol.

[dario03]

Tarteso, on 09 January 2024 - 05:49 PM, said:

95% raderp leaves 0.29 s + spotting time (if any) to lock in LOS if you equip 100% target decay, which is far less than you need just to start moving your reticle over the target. So, pointless change.

And, yeah! all the anti-lurming map design was coincidence.

It wasn't to get lock, it was to keep lock. As in you have a lock, enemy runs in the open except for 0.05 seconds they pass by a rock or pole or something. With 100% dep you would lose lock, 95% you don't.

[crazytimes]

Thorqemada, on 09 January 2024 - 02:59 PM, said:

Oh, its the LRM topic again and the Elephant in the room is not mentioned - its LRM boating!

That can easily be countered by limiting the ammo via reducing the ammo per ton...

It will have next to none affect to people who see the LRM as complementary weapon for certain mech setup but greatly reduce the ability to boat the weapon as LRM boats would run out of ammo quite qickly if you i.e. reduce the ammo per ton by 50% something.

Making LRM even slower as they alredy are - well, you can put a lame in a Segway up for racing LRMs and he would win!



Stop making up excuses for keeping LRM useless!

Like most of the ridiculous "ideas" around LRMs that the forums provide- this is not particularly well thought out.

To LRM effectively requires an investment. Enough tubes to get through AMS, something to cut through ECM and get locks- ie TAG or PPCs. Skills tree investment - all the missile nodes, velocity nodes, target decay nodes. It also requires an investment in facetime to get and hold locks, both before and after firing. You may want to consider active probes as well.

That is a substantial investment which makes no sense as a "complementary" weapon. "I'm just going to invest an extra few tonne in equipment and half my skill tree so I can facetime for an LRM5 backup and get 3 or 4 splash damage if they don't have too much AMS".

That is why they only really have an impact when boated. Halving the ammo would not make potato bracket builds sudden match winners- and the proper group and FP troll boat builds are squeezing in nearly 4000 missiles anyhow. Pretty sure halving that to 2000 but with the fantasy super LRMs of Forum Warrior Online would upset some people still.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Heavy Money, on 09 January 2024 - 06:06 PM, said:

Are you suggesting that we just ignore the possibility of multiple LRM boats being on the same team and trust to players to just be honorable and not play that? lol.

So change how spotting works. Nerf the NARC, since that's the thing that makes indirect fire dangerous. Reduce its duration.

At this point, I'm waiting for someone to make a typo on patch day and accidentally drop a zero when they lower the LRM speed to 170m/s... resulting in missiles that move at 61 kph.

[TheFlyingCrowbar]

I'm looking forward to the new changes.
I usually just run a LRM10 or two LRM5s on mechs for suppression and because they're fun.
Boating LRMs seems to be a bigger issue than the weapons themselves, have they looked into ghost heat for launchers? Unlessa mech gets quirked for it, if they set it at >20 LRMs = ghost heat, that'd cut down the clag storms.

Either way, looking forward to lowered derp, slower indirect and speedy direct fire.

GGs all, see you on the battlefield.

[Heavy Money]

ScrapIron Prime, on 09 January 2024 - 06:57 PM, said:

So change how spotting works. Nerf the NARC, since that's the thing that makes indirect fire dangerous. Reduce its duration.

At this point, I'm waiting for someone to make a typo on patch day and accidentally drop a zero when they lower the LRM speed to 170m/s... resulting in missiles that move at 61 kph.

Its not only NARC groups. Its any spotting. Unless they make a hugely radical change like not being able to share locks at all without tag/NARC, its not going to address it. And then even if they do that and then buff LRMs, then groups that do bring those and coordinate will be busted.

Indirect fire is the problem overall, not merely spotting.

[Vonbach]

Shineplasma, on 09 January 2024 - 03:54 PM, said:

I'd contend that "anyone with a brain" or any relevant perspective whatsoever would understand that the Cauldron has precious little influence on map design - if any at all.

Then how come nearly every map is sniper friendly?

[Heavy Money]

Vonbach, on 09 January 2024 - 09:50 PM, said:

Then how come nearly every map is sniper friendly?

That's because they don't have influence on map design, not because they do.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

Not to mention, what are we defining as "sniper" here? Just the blue lasers?

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 09 January 2024 - 10:00 PM.

[Samziel]

Vonbach, on 09 January 2024 - 09:50 PM, said:

Then how come nearly every map is sniper friendly?

You do realize most maps were made before Cauldron was even a thing?

All maps have plenty of cover from snipers. Even worst complained ones like HPG and Emerald Vale. Falls on the player to utilise them.

You just keep proving Shineplasma about the conspiracies considering Cauldron. They aint all about sniping.

Edited by Samziel, 09 January 2024 - 10:41 PM.

[crazytimes]

Vonbach, on 09 January 2024 - 09:50 PM, said:

Then how come nearly every map is sniper friendly?

Almost the only changes to maps in all the years I have been playing is more cover and less open ground.

But yeah, everything is a conspiracy against only the exact thing you like to play.

[Abisha]

Thorqemada, on 09 January 2024 - 02:59 PM, said:

Oh, its the LRM topic again and the Elephant in the room is not mentioned - its LRM boating!

That can easily be countered by limiting the ammo via reducing the ammo per ton...

It will have next to none affect to people who see the LRM as complementary weapon for certain mech setup but greatly reduce the ability to boat the weapon as LRM boats would run out of ammo quite qickly if you i.e. reduce the ammo per ton by 50% something.

Making LRM even slower as they alredy are - well, you can put a lame in a Segway up for racing LRMs and he would win!



Stop making up excuses for keeping LRM useless!

o wait that makes sense better not do this. because it will fix things.

[Curccu]

Abisha, on 10 January 2024 - 02:43 AM, said:

o wait that makes sense better not do this. because it will fix things.

So smaller (specially IS) mechs which cannot boat lurms because of low tonnage that are struggling to have enough ammo right now would lose half of their already scarce ammo fixes what things? For example TBT-7M with 2xALRM15.

[pbiggz]

Vonbach, on 09 January 2024 - 09:50 PM, said:

Then how come nearly every map is sniper friendly?

1: The cauldron does not make maps
2: Since you effectively cant choose maps, every map has to cater to every playstyle. If you expect to brawl with impunity at any point on any map, then you are setting yourself up for disappointment. Snipers and Brawlers are specialist strategies. They are feast or famine. Either you are in the right place at the right time to take advantage of your kit, or you probably die. That's kind of how it's supposed to be. You feeling like snipers are too strong is not a justification for nerfing snipers or changing maps nor is it proof that the cauldron is conspiring against you.
3: If this thread is indeed just a "cauldron sits in a smoke filled back room buffing sniping because they are evil" thread, then its a waste of a thread. You guys need a hobby or something.

Quicksilver Aberration, on 09 January 2024 - 10:00 PM, said:

Not to mention, what are we defining as "sniper" here? Just the blue lasers?

Honestly at this point im going to assume everything beyond brawling range is just "sniper" to these guys. A non-zero number of these guys must get hosed down at midrange by large pulse and assume blue laser == sniper, then ask no further questions.

Edited by pbiggz, 10 January 2024 - 07:00 AM.

[An6ryMan69]

The Osiris perks look good, not the removal of the SE capture accelerator though.

The HAG buffs are inexplicable, and talk of more LRM nerfs are pure garbage.

The rabbit hole this game is going down to cater to one specific group's preferred playstyle is killing MWO; I'm not regretting reducing my playtime by probably 95% over the last good while.

Somebody needs to come out with a different PVP battletech game that refuses to engage in this caustic behavior....

[Curccu]

pbiggz, on 10 January 2024 - 07:01 AM, said:

2: Since you effectively cant choose maps, every map has to cater to every playstyle.

I boldly claim that there is no freaking way that Solaris City is playable with LRMs been there multiple times and unless enemy just WANTS to do fighting in those few long streets, I'm not doing ****... except QQ about map.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

crazytimes, on 09 January 2024 - 10:55 PM, said:

Almost the only changes to maps in all the years I have been playing is more cover and less open ground.

IDK about this, but I think the changes since Kraz got brought have been good. A lot of the redos of maps prior though were.....rough, bowls did no favors for the perception of the Cauldron even though they were completely unrelated and honestly I preferred the maps prior to the changes, including Canyon.