57 replies to this topic

[ScrapIron Prime]

MrTBSC, on 20 March 2024 - 08:01 AM, said:

i generally run a MRM 120 on my Fafnir FE with quad lmgs for ungabunga ....

i tested a quad TBM 15 build on it

Okay, but you've taken 120 splat damage with a 500 m/s velocity and swapped it out for 60 semi-splat damage with a 190 m/s velocity that is heavier and requires a lock on.

I'm not feeling it.

[Krucilatoz]

i've tested thunderbolts missile on Catapult C1 (for highly rate of fire / low-cooldown) and WHM 7S (speeded missile).

Both were ended badly.
Like i'm now struggling to land the missile into enemy and contribute proper damage in entire match.
LRM have the high angle to pass most obstacles, MRM have speed.
This might be similar to Clan ATM, but clans have faster mech and able to boat more ATM tubes to make signifikan damage.

[ScrapIron Prime]

Nine-Ball, on 20 March 2024 - 08:18 AM, said:

Your doing 120 damage spread over 5 parts... thats... (checks calculator)... 24 damage per part.

Vs 60 damage over 1 or 2 (or even 3 parts) parts which is anywhere from 20-30-60 points of damage.

A not-so subtle difference in damage delivered.

Fair enough, I suppose. That lets you kill people and receive half the match score for your efforts.

[ambosen]

martian, on 20 March 2024 - 03:22 AM, said:

What meaningful and verifiable statistics can you offer? All those new weapons (Thunderbolt missiles included) have been out literally just for a few hours.

Actually, as of the time you'd responded to me, they'd been out for over a day. To say nothing of the public side of the beta testing for the patch, or that both the velocity and launch angle were essentially copied outright from changes that were made to LRM's for a bit.

But I've noticed a stunning inability of a lot of people in this game over the years to notice what's literally right in front of them, and in this particular case, it's that Thunderbolts are literally dead on arrival.

All it took was about a day of the actual finalized version for me to go from seeing nearly anyone who could fit them onto a mech trying to use them to see how they worked to seeing many of those exact same players, using the exact same mechs having given up and gone back to literally any other category of weapon capable of what's effectively line of sight firing at ranges of 600 or less meters. You know, the distance LRM's MRM's, pretty much every PPC, autocannon, gauss weapon, and more then half of the available laser weapons in the game can be used in with far more likelyhood of you, know working as a viable weapon.

The real indicator to me though was how often people tried to fire Thunderbolts at me, and they never managed to make it close enough for my token AMS system on the handful of mechs I haven't removed them entirely from following the years long process the devs have spent trying to totall nerf LRM's into functional near uselessness to even try to engage them. It says a lot when you end a match where theoretically Thunderbolts are firing in plenty at you personally with the exact same ammo count for your AMS as when you started.

Edited by ambosen, 20 March 2024 - 08:43 AM.

[ambosen]

ScrapIron Prime, on 20 March 2024 - 08:09 AM, said:

Okay, but you've taken 120 splat damage with a 500 m/s velocity and swapped it out for 60 semi-splat damage with a 190 m/s velocity that is heavier and requires a lock on.

I'm not feeling it.

And frequently just due to arc and speed won't ever get to your target at all. That's the real problem. A lot of maps in this game already have designs that create problems with using other lock on capable missile weapons. Thunderbolts are in the particularly unenviable position of being even worse with an already long existent problem then a lot of those same missile weapons.

[martian]

ambosen, on 20 March 2024 - 08:39 AM, said:

Actually, as of the time you'd responded to me, they'd been out for over a day.

Well, it was about 17 hours, but this is not important.

ambosen, on 20 March 2024 - 08:39 AM, said:

To say nothing of the public side of the beta testing for the patch, or that both the velocity and launch angle were essentially copied outright from changes that were made to LRM's for a bit.

But I've noticed a stunning inability of a lot of people in this game over the years to notice what's literally right in front of them, and in this particular case, it's that Thunderbolts are literally dead on arrival.

All it took was about a day of the actual finalized version for me to go from seeing nearly anyone who could fit them onto a mech trying to use them to see how they worked to seeing many of those exact same players, using the exact same mechs having given up and gone back to literally any other category of weapon capable of what's effectively line of sight firing at ranges of 600 or less meters. You know, the distance LRM's MRM's, pretty much every PPC, autocannon, gauss weapon, and more then half of the available laser weapons in the game can be used in with far more likelyhood of you, know working as a viable weapon.

The real indicator to me though was how often people tried to fire Thunderbolts at me, and they never managed to make it close enough for my token AMS system on the handful of mechs I haven't removed them entirely from following the years long process the devs have spent trying to totall nerf LRM's into functional near uselessness to even try to engage them. It says a lot when you end a match where theoretically Thunderbolts are firing in plenty at you personally with the exact same ammo count for your AMS as when you started.

Thank you for your long post.

Now you can post your verifiable statistics.

[MrTBSC]

ScrapIron Prime, on 20 March 2024 - 08:09 AM, said:

Okay, but you've taken 120 splat damage with a 500 m/s velocity and swapped it out for 60 semi-splat damage with a 190 m/s velocity that is heavier and requires a lock on.

I'm not feeling it.

it doesn´t require a lock as you can dumbfire them ... but lock on is much better obviously
MRMs especially the larger batteries also fire in a stream so you have to hold on target for the duration

i do agree though that at the very least the thunderbolt 20 is way too heavy (5,10 and 15 feel fair enough imho) even compared to a MRM 40 ( MRM 40 takes 2 more slots), it has the same weight as a IS UAC 20 with the latter being also able to deal double damage

... compared to a IS standard gaussrifle it may deal 5 dmg more but loses out on range ... sooo yea ... this one despite having projectileguidance might be the least favorable weapon imo

[MrTBSC]

ScrapIron Prime, on 20 March 2024 - 08:32 AM, said:

Fair enough, I suppose. That lets you kill people and receive half the match score for your efforts.

the matchscore system is bad anyway it doesn´t even offer points for supportive actions

[Ihlrath]

I'll say this much....

their cockpit shake is annoying AF.

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MrTBSC, on 20 March 2024 - 10:06 AM, said:

the matchscore system is bad anyway it doesn´t even offer points for supportive actions

I don't know if you meant it this way, but generally doing damage and threatening space is better support than someone who provides "locks", "fire support", or AMS bubbles which is what I feel like people typically mean when it comes to that.

That said match score is bad because how do you quantify zoning? Match score is honestly worse at gauging player performance than just looking at W:L short of having MWO's own equivalent of KAST percentages from Counterstrike.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 20 March 2024 - 12:03 PM.

[Wraith 1]

Best lock-on weapon in the game, they actually deal focused damage.

They still absolutely suck, you can pretty much only sucker punch unaware or bad targets, and a high-velocity missile with much weaker guidance would be a lot more fun. But that's exactly the same as every other lock-on, and these ones can actually kill things when you hit them, and they still have 50% of their damage at point-blank.

The crazy firing arcs are a known testing ground bug. The arc in actual matches is fine, probably more capable of indirect fire than it should be.

[martian]

Used Thunderbolts and had some fun with them.

Not OP weapons, but they have some uses.

Achieved some hits and kills with them. It seems to me that enemy players really do not like Thunderbolt hits.

[Felbombling]

Revisiting my initial thoughts, I'm still not impressed with the weapon system. One positive I can identify is external geometry working for the player. The Thunderbolt 15 and 20 summon an SRM 4 model for representation. This can really save your bacon on many Mechs, like the Black Knight, Mauler and Corsair as examples. A larger MRM or LRM rack would summon a beefier model addition, which would be much easier to hit in game while taking enemy fire.

Beyond that, if they want these things to work as a viable weapon, they should fall back on the original design and make them one single missile with the corresponding damage potential and ammo types. The tonnage investment needs to be justified by fear factor.

Edited by Felbombling, 21 March 2024 - 10:16 AM.

[Pixel Hunter]

ambosen, on 20 March 2024 - 08:39 AM, said:

The real indicator to me though was how often people tried to fire Thunderbolts at me, and they never managed to make it close enough for my token AMS system on the handful of mechs I haven't removed them entirely from following the years long process the devs have spent trying to totall nerf LRM's into functional near uselessness to even try to engage them. It says a lot when you end a match where theoretically Thunderbolts are firing in plenty at you personally with the exact same ammo count for your AMS as when you started.

I honestly think something is broken with them. Wild inaccuracy, some seem to track, and others seems to go crazy immediately. I would guess that needs to be addressed next patch

[ambosen]

martian, on 20 March 2024 - 01:24 PM, said:

Used Thunderbolts and had some fun with them.

Not OP weapons, but they have some uses.

Achieved some hits and kills with them. It seems to me that enemy players really do not like Thunderbolt hits.

We'd have to see one occur first.

[ambosen]

Pixel Hunter, on 21 March 2024 - 05:55 AM, said:

I honestly think something is broken with them. Wild inaccuracy, some seem to track, and others seems to go crazy immediately. I would guess that needs to be addressed next patch

A large part of it I think is that there's a very tiny but extremely vocal portion of this community that wants to permanently remove any indirect fire mechanic whatsoever from the game.

They've basically been browbeating the devs to do it since the very first private beta which was long before a lot of the people here ever joined the forum by the way.

This ignores that due a combination of map design factors (the widespread invisible walls how many areas of the map become straight up impassable without some sort of suppressing fire mechanic to let other elements of a team of mechs move ect, for example) any weapon using the indirect fire capability needs a sadly, fairly steep in comparison to many games parabolic trajectory.The constant efforts to reduce or entirely flatten the trajectory would be a virtual non issue, if they weren't trying to essentially redesign maps according to FPS arena shooter mechanics in a lot of ways.

Basically some users want to turn all missile weapons into direct fire weapons like the bulk of other weapons in the game. Even though it doesn't really work, on a functional level.

[MrTBSC]

Quicksilver Aberration, on 20 March 2024 - 12:03 PM, said:

I don't know if you meant it this way, but generally doing damage and threatening space is better support than someone who provides "locks", "fire support", or AMS bubbles which is what I feel like people typically mean when it comes to that.

That said match score is bad because how do you quantify zoning? Match score is honestly worse at gauging player performance than just looking at W:L short of having MWO's own equivalent of KAST percentages from Counterstrike.

basically any combination that helps besides just hitting the enemy with stuff because that´s just too obvious (what do you mean with "threatening space"?), yes that includes locks, that includes scouting, countering ECM bubbles and stealth with narc, TAG and active probe (the latter if close enough besides just spotting shutdown mechs).
this game offers very little incentive to include the gear for actual teamplay matchscorewise (even if you run a team/unit). i do think there is space for creating a build capable to both offer reconnaissance while still allowing it for skirmish or playing a flanker. of course you will be outgunned against a damagefocused build but the point is to involve most of the team with the scoutingiformation given while staying out of harm (or do hit and runs) .. afterall the enemy can´t shoot/hit you when you aren´t there but him still eating dmg

i dont´know if there have been any changes to narc and TAG but i find they definitively should reveal any mech that uses ECM/stealth or any mech within a ECM bubble ... otherwise they should be buffed .... and yea it would be VERY nice if the scoresystem would provide an appropriate reward for that on a regular basis ... but i suppose we can´t expect that any time soon ... or ever ...

Edited by MrTBSC, 21 March 2024 - 01:22 PM.

[martian]

ambosen, on 21 March 2024 - 11:29 AM, said:

We'd have to see one occur first.

No problem. Check these screenshots.

1. Note the reward notification announcing the enemy 'Mech kill. Also note that TAG kill reward showing that the kill was made with the TAG assistance.

2. Note the wireframe in the upper right corner showing the freshly gutted enemy Piranha.

3. Note the weapon status display showing cold lasers and a reloading pair of TB10 Thunderbolt Missile launchers.




The game was not bad and I think I contributed to my team's victory. I played cautiously because I did not quite know what to expect from Thunderbolt Missiles.



I added some secondary activities and earned acceptable payout and Experience.



This is my BattleMech that I used.



Thunderbolt MIssiles work for me, even though they are not OP weapons (as I mentioned above).

[Quicksilver Aberration]

MrTBSC, on 21 March 2024 - 01:19 PM, said:

basically any combination that helps besides just hitting the enemy with stuff because that´s just too obvious (what do you mean with "threatening space"?), yes that includes locks, that includes scouting, countering ECM bubbles and stealth with narc, TAG and active probe (the latter if close enough besides just spotting shutdown mechs).
this game offers very little incentive to include the gear for actual teamplay matchscorewise (even if you run a team/unit). i do think there is space for creating a build capable to both offer reconnaissance while still allowing it for skirmish or playing a flanker. of course you will be outgunned against a damagefocused build but the point is to involve most of the team with the scoutingiformation given while staying out of harm (or do hit and runs) .. afterall the enemy can´t shoot/hit you when you aren´t there but him still eating dmg

i dont´know if there have been any changes to narc and TAG but i find they definitively should reveal any mech that uses ECM/stealth or any mech within a ECM bubble ... otherwise they should be buffed .... and yea it would be VERY nice if the scoresystem would provide an appropriate reward for that on a regular basis ... but i suppose we can´t expect that any time soon ... or ever ...

I couldn't find any really good explanations of zoning/spacing as it applies to FPS, but it applies to any "tactical" FPS as much as it does fighting games given there is some element of rock/paper/scissors happening.

Flanking and scouting are a plenty....if you play competitively because it just matters way more where there are fewer eyes on the board. The more players the less valuable scouting honestly is, and the less coordinated a team is, the less valuable that info is just because no one can really exploit that info (which again is why it is useful in comp). Radar pings are useful in uncoordinated environments, but there are just so many things stacked against radar sharing in that environment whether it be due to radar being only LoS with limited range or due to ECM/Stealth completely nullifying it that its no shock that its not that useful. It's just better to just brute force your way through matches because of just the sheer amount of armor you need to bleed through and the lack of coordination that can check players getting away with things that they really shouldn't

You don't need gear/equipment to make the game about team play, pacing can do that work for you. Slow rotations/movement and/or long TTK can make all the difference in that regard. It's honestly funny when people talk about this game like team play isn't a thing when all a lot of people have done is just solo queue. If you expect solo queue to ever be that sort of environment then you've clearly never learned anything from practically any other multiplayer game.

All kits that "encourage" team play typically end up coupling you to other kits which means if no one has them, you are left in the dust. Most situations, those kind of specific/gimmicky utility ends up being garbage because of that dependency makes it really hard to work around and those isn't about "encouraging" team play but making you solely dependent on it. Just ask Overwatch how well that's worked out for them.

Edited by Quicksilver Aberration, 21 March 2024 - 02:20 PM.

[Pixel Hunter]

ambosen, on 21 March 2024 - 11:38 AM, said:

A large part of it I think is that there's a very tiny but extremely vocal portion of this community that wants to permanently remove any indirect fire mechanic whatsoever from the game.

They've basically been browbeating the devs to do it since the very first private beta which was long before a lot of the people here ever joined the forum by the way.

This ignores that due a combination of map design factors (the widespread invisible walls how many areas of the map become straight up impassable without some sort of suppressing fire mechanic to let other elements of a team of mechs move ect, for example) any weapon using the indirect fire capability needs a sadly, fairly steep in comparison to many games parabolic trajectory.The constant efforts to reduce or entirely flatten the trajectory would be a virtual non issue, if they weren't trying to essentially redesign maps according to FPS arena shooter mechanics in a lot of ways.

Basically some users want to turn all missile weapons into direct fire weapons like the bulk of other weapons in the game. Even though it doesn't really work, on a functional level.

I can see the thunderbolt trade off being a "direct fire only" (and I agree, they are too powerful for indirect) but they have to throw a little bit of a bone here. Wide open on the test map missiles are behaving not as they should, even with a direct line of sight. They need just to have almost no arc and shoot in a straight line like SRM's or MRM's but still track if LOS is broken for some unknown reason. I suspect something is causing the game engine to think something is in the way, or for that matter they coded the miss chance too high on accident. maybe a .025 became a .25 or something.