356 replies to this topic

[foamyesque]

Samziel, on 07 January 2024 - 09:46 PM, said:

They already are a spread weapon because of pellet count. If you dont twist no amount of changes will balance the game for you. But it doesnt have a similar spread built in like LBX (shotgun) or missiles (multiple tubes side by side).

How's about recoil, if we're pointing at, I guess, physical rationales for spread?

[Frost_Byte]

Novakaine, on 07 January 2024 - 09:31 PM, said:

And why should they not be top tier weapons?
Simple question.

As I stated in my earlier post, they are weapons that aim for you and require very little aim and effort. Therefore they should be worse than weapons that require active aiming and effort.

If you missed it in my word wall(I wouldn't blame you, a lot of text), I'd read this part again.

Frost_Byte, on 07 January 2024 - 09:12 PM, said:

One final note though. While we do want to fix up LRMs, I don't think they should ever be top tier weapons. Same goes for streak SRMs. Any weapon that aims for you should inherently be weaker, as the game should reward you for the amount of effort and skill a weapon takes. Higher skill, higher reward. Which is why I think dakka should be the strongest playstyle in MWO as it requires constant exposure and the ability to hit and lead shot after shot after shot.

[Saved By The Bell]

I wasnt LRMed badly for several years. Because I know, where to hide and where run for cover.
I had good lessons in my beginning.

Lets do this. Direct LRMing should be improved (when you see the target, pressing R by yourself, taking enemy fire).
Undirect LRMing should be punished.

[Samziel]

foamyesque, on 07 January 2024 - 09:55 PM, said:

How's about recoil, if we're pointing at, I guess, physical rationales for spread?

Sure. But arent RACs without spread in TT? Which is it, lore or not lore? Again, maybe TT shouldn't affect FPS game balance.

Unsure if HAGs would have much recoil due shooting multitude of small slugs and no explosion in barrel.

Edited by Samziel, 07 January 2024 - 10:39 PM.

[foamyesque]

Samziel, on 07 January 2024 - 10:16 PM, said:

Sure. But arent RACs without spread in TT? Which is it, lore or not lore?

I dunno, ask Frost_Byte. They're the one who pointed to lore being important.

So if lore's important, HAGs spread. And if you want to ask 'but how does a single barrel spread', well, there's a simple answer to that. And in game balance terms, they need to spread their damage around because, you know, they've got UAC/20 damage at gauss rifle ranges, and the Cauldron knows this which is why they're trying other ways to make the guns spread, instead of spread, for reasons that essentially amount to 'I am aesthetically displeased by this mechanic'.

so i dunno!

[Samziel]

foamyesque, on 07 January 2024 - 10:41 PM, said:

I dunno, ask Frost_Byte. They're the one who pointed to lore being important.

So if lore's important, HAGs spread. And if you want to ask 'but how does a single barrel spread', well, there's a simple answer to that. And in game balance terms, they need to spread their damage around because, you know, they've got UAC/20 damage at gauss rifle ranges, and the Cauldron knows this which is why they're trying other ways to make the guns spread, instead of spread, for reasons that essentially amount to 'I am aesthetically displeased by this mechanic'.

so i dunno!

Again. The issue with HAGs aint the range. If you're shooting them max range they WILL spread. Increasing their spread will do nothing to balance them short to midrange, which is why they're introducing splash instead.

But point was comparing them to actual spread weapons. HAGs can be either or, but LBX can only spread (aside solid slugs which aint in game).

Edited by Samziel, 07 January 2024 - 10:57 PM.

[Frost_Byte]

A weapon that takes approximately one second to fire all 8 shells inherently has spread(will be a little under a second post patch). The only time all of your HAG shells hit one component is when a mech is standing still.

We don't balance around opponents standing still.

[Novakaine]

Samziel, on 07 January 2024 - 09:46 PM, said:

You have reading comprehension issues



They already are a spread weapon because of pellet count. If you dont twist no amount of changes will balance the game for you. But it doesnt have a similar spread built in like LBX (shotgun) or missiles (multiple tubes side by side).

I've always said **** TT if it gets in the way of game balance. I dont care if they'd change HAGs to something like light HAG etc. But theres always people whining about muh TT.

No one knows you.

[Vonbach]

Frost_Byte, on 07 January 2024 - 10:56 PM, said:

A weapon that takes approximately one second to fire all 8 shells inherently has spread(will be a little under a second post patch). The only time all of your HAG shells hit one component is when a mech is standing still.

We don't balance around opponents standing still.

You do when your "balancing" LRMs.

[foamyesque]

Samziel, on 07 January 2024 - 10:53 PM, said:

Again. The issue with HAGs aint the range. If you're shooting them max range they WILL spread. Increasing their spread will do nothing to balance them short to midrange, which is why they're introducing splash instead.

Yeah the pellet burst duration imposes some spread. So? Other weapons have durations and spreads. MRMs come immediately to mind, for example. You wanna sit here and tell me MRMs should be laser accurate because they fire in a stream? Or cLRMs, which not only have spread and a stream but also move 1/10th the speed of HAGs, but are somehow still 'too fast' for people to react to?

C'mon. Let's not pretend there's some great balance argument for no-spread HAGs here. We have an acknowledgement that the damage needs to be spread, that duration isn't enough to do it, and that's why now we get splash like a cERPPC. You can say spread doesn't matter at close range, but that's kind of silly when one of the reasons even the modest original spread from release was removed was, allegedly, 'it feels bad when the weapon spreads its damage around'.

Give it a screen-shaking recoil like the HGauss or something if a simple firecone is just so desperately unpalatable, but the entire point of a firecone is to reduce the power of precision pixel clicking, and it does that just fine at short/mid by forcing component misses and clean misses.

Splash'll help. But the crusade against spread as a game mechanic feels really weird and unjustified.

[Samziel]

foamyesque, on 07 January 2024 - 11:47 PM, said:

Yeah the pellet burst duration imposes some spread. So? Other weapons have durations and spreads. MRMs come immediately to mind, for example. You wanna sit here and tell me MRMs should be laser accurate because they fire in a stream? Or cLRMs, which not only have spread and a stream but also move 1/10th the speed of HAGs, but are somehow still 'too fast' for people to react to?

C'mon. Let's not pretend there's some great balance argument for no-spread HAGs here. We have an acknowledgement that the damage needs to be spread, that duration isn't enough to do it, and that's why now we get splash like a cERPPC. You can say spread doesn't matter at close range, but that's kind of silly when one of the reasons even the modest original spread from release was removed was, allegedly, 'it feels bad when the weapon spreads its damage around'.

Give it a screen-shaking recoil like the HGauss or something if a simple firecone is just so desperately unpalatable, but the entire point of a firecone is to reduce the power of precision pixel clicking, and it does that just fine at short/mid by forcing component misses and clean misses.

Splash'll help. But the crusade against spread as a game mechanic feels really weird and unjustified.

Okay I forgot important detail here. We are talking about random spread with the HAGs. MRMs hit where you aim in a fixed pattern. Makes sense to have that fixed pattern since you shoot from multiple tubes side by side. RACs (and previously HAGs) have a random spread. It feels annoying not hit where you aim. Now I dont know if its possible to have a fixed pattern for the spread (like guns in CS) but the splash basically achieves that to extent. It reduces all HAG pinpoint damage by 20%. For all ranges.

Obviously spread did affect midrange a little but it was neglible in short range. And if you make it meaningful in short range it will be too much from midrange upwards. Point is they want the weapon to be balanced for all ranges and spread doesnt achieve that.

LRMs are a different thing entirely. You don't aim them. Not worth comparing to.

And maybe I'm being too much on the other side here. Personally I dont mind spread. But I do understand the point of not having it. Which is what I'm trying to explain here.

Novakaine, on 07 January 2024 - 10:57 PM, said:

No one knows you.

So?

Edited by Samziel, 08 January 2024 - 12:25 AM.

[Curccu]

How about removing missile warning? (Probably needs engineering that we don't have .)

[MechMaster059]

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

...
Just because I am saying that cover should be utilized as a defense to LRM spam does not imply making LRMS useless. At all.

The degree of cover is the exact thing that comes into question by reducing the "attack arc" of LRMS. The canyon in Canyon network is actually the PERFECT example of this.

Perhaps I read a little too much into what you were saying about cover but it seemed you were implying cover in general doesn't currently provide adequate protection against LRMs and you used the lousy example of the trenches in Canyon Network as proof. No, the trenches in Canyon Network are not the "PERFECT" example... Jesus.

The trenches have a wide variation in their shape across the map but there are long stretches in some parts where the side of the trench is at most a 50-60 degree angle from the ground. I'm thinking to myself "My God, that's this guy's standard? He want a 50-60 degree grade to be able to block LRMs!?". Some of the trench sides go up to about an 80 degree grade and those do offer some protection depending upon the firing direction of the LRMs. But, once again, they're not good cover because their V shape means you cannot position your mech flush against the trench side like you can with a building or pillar.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

Yes the mesas provide cover true. Yes those trenches are dangerous. However, in every Canyon network match....people WILL traverse them because they also provide cover from sniper fire, and mid-range fire. Its almost necessary to do so. Its making it out of those canyons is where it can be a problem.

I'm just honestly surprised you think LRM fire into the trenches is a big deal. Those trenches are a trade-off in that they provide a way to discretely move around the map if the enemy doesn't know you're in them but they're known to be death traps if the enemy has control of the surrounding ridge line with spotters looking into them.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

..
LRMs coming over that canyon wall line when you have nowhere to go feels like crap to play against and helps perpetuate this aura that LRMs are op...which they are not. They are just broken in ways that no one wants to address or dont see.

Indeed, no one likes being pelted by LRMs and I have been killed by LRMs in those trenches, but it occurs to me there's something else you haven't mentioned Moadebe, something you're missing... You're getting pounded by LRMs in a trench and there's nothing you can do about it? Really? Nothing? I think there's something else you can do about it.

Here's a hint: Corsair.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

Lemme match your energy here. YOU....couldn't be more wrong if you tried. As I said I don't know you and you OBVIOUSLY don't know me.

With my amount of time that I have played being this...

and some of my signature mechs being....

and more importantly this one (which I have been using for YEARS at this point off and on)...

You could not be more wrong if you tried.

Saying LRMs are meant to primarily be a direct fire weapon is an unhinged, far-out, wacky, crazy person, beyond the pale, outrageous, and downright un-American level statement. Even Kamala Harris wouldn't say something that silly.
[Redacted]
Why would anyone playing a Clan mech choose LRMs over ATMs for direct fire? The 60m ATM dead zone? C'mon man. ATMs BLOW LRMs AWAY for direct fire.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

For example....(multiple 600+ damage matches and multple kills in this one alone)....

Getting high damage in a Spider-5V or Locust-1V with X-Pulse lasers doesn't count. The quirks on those mechs are OP as hell with X-Pulse lasers. Doing well with them means nothing.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

Is the second time you have gone with an "absolute" mindset. The first one being...

An all or nothing thought process. "If you are going to go direct LOS why even bother with LRMs in general?" Thats not the nature of this game first of all. ...

Me stating LRMs are primarily an indirect fire weapon is not an "all or nothing thought process". It's an obvious fact if you take an objective look at their stats. LRMs are the ONLY weapon that can indirect fire. ATMs supposedly can indirect fire but in my admittedly limited experience with them, they are nearly impossible to fire indirectly due to their flat trajectory. I honestly don't know how it's possible to indirect fire ATMs. They will instantly slam into whatever cover is between you and the target.

Then you couple this with LRMs very slow speed, massive IS dead zone of 180m and Clan damage drop-off, which makes them inferior to other LOS missiles, and its simply obvious that their primary use-case is indirect fire and if that use case gets sufficiently nerfed then LRMs won't be viable anymore.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

Yes it is isnt it. Going off of other's targets. However that does not imply you can sit back behind cover and do nothing but LRM the whole match. Sharing armor is a thing. Repositioning and staying with the team. Target saturation against the enemy team is another thing. Calling targets. LRMing from a secondary line behind the brawly front line is a thing.

Right, so you agree playing an LRM mech WELL requires team play. In my experience, sitting there just firing LRMs at spotted targets at max range doesn't work well. You get some shots and then the enemy repositions and your LRMs don't hit anymore. This idea that LRMs are something that can be played passively for easy wins is way over-blown.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

No you dont. You dont NEED a spotter. Do they help the situation? Absolutely. You should be going off of other's targetting and assisting them. Not you being the main show unless you are in a dedicated group with a member kitted out purely for spotting for you. Then it becomes vastly easier to pull off.

Perhaps we're using terms differently here. By "spotter" I don't mean a dedicated NARC Raven or some such mech. I mean anyone who can provide line of sight for you and yes, you most definitely needs someone else to provide LOS for you in indirect fire mode because firing indirectly directly implies you don't have LOS to the target yourself.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

I already touched on this, but true. However by doing this you are not in extreme ranges and are more of a mid to short range role.

Just because you reposition with your team doesn't necessarily mean you automatically get put into short range. If both sides are nascaring in the same direction you can stay at long range for quite some time.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

Using them currently is a nightmare with how their lockon system works. Especially with Radar Deprivation and ECM how they currently are. Everyone keeps trying to buff the weapon system itself without addressing the actual problems with playing them. Which is what my suggestions address.

Agreed.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

I do NOT agree with nerfing their velocity.

Nor do I. Horrible knee-jerk idea.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

Currently its a severe peek and poke warrior with sniping as the meta (sorry not sorry .... it is still meta and TOO strong imo.)

Yup.

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

When it gets frustrating to get shot at and one starts to feel helpless to counter it...thats where the indirect arc nerf comes into play.

Indeed but my concern is that there seems to be no end in sight for LRM nerfs and they're nowhere near being an OP weapon (HAGs and blue laser spam is MUCH worse) so what the hell is going on here?

Moadebe, on 07 January 2024 - 04:19 PM, said:

Take care and ill probably respond to whatever response is given...depending on energy. I do like a good conversation. Even debate. I am more than willing to talk about my opinions on the matter and points of view.

I'm glad to hear that Moadebe. I think your idea about providing a baseline of 0.5s lock duration combined with equal amounts of non-percentage based lock time given by Target Decay and taken away by Radar Deprivation is the way to go regarding the skill point portion of the problems with LRMs.

Edited by GM Patience, 12 January 2024 - 09:33 AM.

[Mochyn Pupur]

Frost_Byte, on 07 January 2024 - 10:00 PM, said:

As I stated in my earlier post, they are weapons that aim for you and require very little aim and effort. Therefore they should be worse than weapons that require active aiming and effort.

If you missed it in my word wall(I wouldn't blame you, a lot of text), I'd read this part again.

So, a weapon system that can require you to hold an active lock for up to 20s, even with all nodes and targeting computers, before being able to fire requires very little aim or effort (poor/ no los, ecm, movement, radar dep and unrealistic motion, pushes lock times up drastically)? What game are you playing, because it is certainly not MWO!

[redacted]

Edited by Ekson Valdez, 11 January 2024 - 10:45 PM.

[Navid A1]

Mochyn Pupur, on 08 January 2024 - 01:42 AM, said:

So, a weapon system that can require you to hold an active lock for up to 20s, even with all nodes and targeting computers, before being able to fire requires very little aim or effort (poor/ no los, ecm, movement, radar dep and unrealistic motion, pushes lock times up drastically)? What game are you playing, because it is certainly not MWO!

[redacted]

I play MWO and I find hovering the mouse over a gigantic square from the safety of being across the map behind cover the easiest thing in video game history.

Only thing that I find frustrating when playing lock-ons is how strong radar deprivation is, which is being nerf'd.

Really... is it just me or more and more players think hovering the mouse over a gigantic square that doesn't even move around that fast is becoming harder for them? is it age?

Edited by Ekson Valdez, 11 January 2024 - 10:48 PM.
quote cleanup

[MechMaster059]

Navid A1, on 08 January 2024 - 02:11 AM, said:

Really... is it just me or more and more players think hovering the mouse over a gigantic square that doesn't even move around that fast is becoming harder for them?

This is sad to see...

The whole square does not provide lock-on. (Which is arbitrary and dumb) There is a smaller area within that square that provides lock-on. The size of said area is not indicated on the HUD. You just have to figure it out by experience.

Keeping a target in this area for 1 second is NOT trivial if you are:
- being shot at
- have your HUD shaken by impacts
- in a brawl
- moving / rotating to keep the target in LOS
- the target is a small and fast light/medium mech

Just very sad to see you have such a dismissive attitude towards LRM issues...

[Navid A1]

MechMaster059, on 08 January 2024 - 02:39 AM, said:

This is sad to see...

The whole square does not provide lock-on. (Which is arbitrary and dumb) There is a smaller area within that square that provides lock-on. The size of said area is not indicated on the HUD. You just have to figure it out by experience.

Keeping a target in this area for 1 second is NOT trivial if you are:
- being shot at
- have your HUD shaken by impacts
- in a brawl
- moving / rotating to keep the target in LOS
- the target is a small and fast light/medium mech

Just very sad to see you have such a dismissive attitude towards LRM issues...

The size of the said area is 50% of the size of the square. Roughly the same size of a desktop icon.

There is no reason to be sad about. That's honestly how I feel playing lock-ons. The most frustrating counter is radar deprivation, by far.

Edited by Navid A1, 08 January 2024 - 02:51 AM.

[Bennesto]

Navid was playing/testing LRM Timberwolf during Ash's livestream for hours. And his damage results were staggering. I am really sorry to be that guy on the forums (again) but if you cannot do consistent damage w/ a homing missle weapon system there are 3 possibilities as to why:

- Enemy has an absurd amount of ECM present -> ECM has been nerfed as a result and rightfully so
- Enemy has an absurd amount of Radar Deprivation -> you can be sure it is getting looked at, esp. if Cauldronman thinks the same
- Skill issue of the LRM user -> unfixable, even by Cauldronman

[Frost_Byte]

Mochyn Pupur, on 08 January 2024 - 01:42 AM, said:

So, a weapon system that can require you to hold an active lock for up to 20s, even with all nodes and targeting computers, before being able to fire requires very little aim or effort (poor/ no los, ecm, movement, radar dep and unrealistic motion, pushes lock times up drastically)? What game are you playing, because it is certainly not MWO!

Where are you getting 20 seconds from? Even with every debuff under the sun, the max I can get is around 10 seconds. In most scenarios, it will be somewhere between 2 and 5 seconds. Even if it would take 20 seconds from across the map, I would still chart that down as minimal effort compared to other weapons. If your reticle is within 2 degrees, you can acquire a lock. You won't lose a lock until you get around 4-5 degrees away.

As compared to weapons that require pinpoint aiming and precise shots on targets, I would definitely chart lock on weapons as much easier to use than other weapons. I've played this game for a long time and play at the highest level. Lock on weapons prove to be the easiest weapons to use in the game, and as such should be marginally weaker than direct aiming weapons.

MechMaster059, on 08 January 2024 - 02:39 AM, said:

This is sad to see...

The whole square does not provide lock-on. (Which is arbitrary and dumb) There is a smaller area within that square that provides lock-on. The size of said area is not indicated on the HUD. You just have to figure it out by experience.

Keeping a target in this area for 1 second is NOT trivial if you are:
- being shot at
- have your HUD shaken by impacts
- in a brawl
- moving / rotating to keep the target in LOS
- the target is a small and fast light/medium mech

Just very sad to see you have such a dismissive attitude towards LRM issues...

Yes, being under fire can make things difficult. However, those same circumstances exist when using direct fire weapons. If lockons are harder in that challenge, weapons that don't aim for you are even harder.

I feel like a major point of what I said above was missed. We don't want to remove LRMs, we don't want to make them useless, nor do we want to nerf them into the ground. We just don't think they should be as strong as weapons that require more skill to use.

At the end of it all, by nerfing radar deprivation, LRMs are getting a net buff actually.

I hope my posts help explain the choices that we made for this patch. We haven't even posted the patch notes, nor have we revealed what we're doing with LRMs yet exactly and already all this commotion! Looking forward to when patch notes drop.

[MechMaster059]

Navid A1, on 08 January 2024 - 02:50 AM, said:

The size of the said area is 50% of the size of the square.

Why? I'm being dead serious. This is an even bigger issue with STREAKs since they are often used at brawling range and is a contributing factor to making STREAKs sub-par weapons.

Keeping a light mech zipping/jumping around in that area is NOT easy.

Please expand it to being the size of the entire square. This would be a big help for LRMers AND STREAKers.