26 replies to this topic

[MaddMaxx]

Aegis Kleais™, on 10 February 2012 - 07:20 AM, said:

It'll be known once the game is out. I was just assuming, for sake of explanation, that it was 150m. I think SSRMs would have lock ability, but no minimum arming distance, since they are designed for short-range encounters. I think I'm in speculation overdrive right now just off of sheer anticipation for this game

I edited my post but you are to fast.

That might explain why I can't seem to stay off the forums.

[SilentObserver]

Aegis Kleais™, on 10 February 2012 - 06:42 AM, said:

Personally, I would like to be able to lock at any range, and then just monitor my HUD info about how far away the Mech is to ensure that when I choose to fire the weapons, they will be armed by the time they hit.

This would be beneficial to me as well because I can get lock on someone while in a a range that is too close, and maintain the lock so that the moment we have enough distance, I can fire immediately, rather than begin at that point to acquire the lock. Again, just my thoughts. I'm gonna be rockin LRMs pretty often.

While i can totally see how this would be advantagous, it might also be i think could be really confusing to have an active lock when i really shouldnt fire. If i am using a lot of weapons i'd rather not have to keep looking at the range to target to figure out if my LRM's are worth firing.

I predict a lot of LRM's bouncing harmlessly off of mech armor. (which is WAY better then the no minimum range of previous MW games)

[Aegis Kleais]

SilentObserver, on 10 February 2012 - 08:40 AM, said:

While i can totally see how this would be advantagous, it might also be i think could be really confusing to have an active lock when i really shouldnt fire. If i am using a lot of weapons i'd rather not have to keep looking at the range to target to figure out if my LRM's are worth firing.

I predict a lot of LRM's bouncing harmlessly off of mech armor. (which is WAY better then the no minimum range of previous MW games)

Well, you don't have to look at a range indicator to do any math. The color of the diamond reticule would change automatically. As long as it's green, the missiles should be armed by the time they hit your target. If you have lock and the reticule is amber, you're too close for the missiles; they'll track to the target, but they won't detonate.

I can understand a desire to not have to read a numeric value and do repeated math in the heat of battle, so a "yes/no" color scheme would be easier to quickly determine, IMO.

[Felix Dante]

SilentObserver, on 10 February 2012 - 08:40 AM, said:

While i can totally see how this would be advantagous, it might also be i think could be really confusing to have an active lock when i really shouldnt fire. If i am using a lot of weapons i'd rather not have to keep looking at the range to target to figure out if my LRM's are worth firing.
I predict a lot of LRM's bouncing harmlessly off of mech armor. (which is WAY better then the no minimum range of previous MW games)

I agree mostly.

That's why I was thinking that if a target is too close (within minimum range) that the LRM targeting system could just prevent a missile lock and you could still fire them direct fire with a slightly bigger missile spread (less grouping of damage). This represents the harder to hit % as they generally travel in a straight shot without a lock rather than track targets and therefore would be a waster of ammo is most cases. (I feel ammo WILL be a heavy factor in long games when it comes to LRMs.) However, if someone is charging straight at you to get into Minimums after you have a lock-on, they will still probably take a good measure of LRMs in the face, since the shot comes out fairly straight.

I also felt that it might be easier to code/develop into the game...but that, and everything else here is just speculation of course.

[SilentObserver]

Felix Dante, on 10 February 2012 - 10:18 AM, said:

I agree mostly.

That's why I was thinking that if a target is too close (within minimum range) that the LRM targeting system could just prevent a missile lock and you could still fire them direct fire with a slightly bigger missile spread (less grouping of damage). This represents the harder to hit % as they generally travel in a straight shot without a lock rather than track targets and therefore would be a waster of ammo is most cases. (I feel ammo WILL be a heavy factor in long games when it comes to LRMs.) However, if someone is charging straight at you to get into Minimums after you have a lock-on, they will still probably take a good measure of LRMs in the face, since the shot comes out fairly straight.

I also felt that it might be easier to code/develop into the game...but that, and everything else here is just speculation of course.

Did you really just like your own post?

My problem with having LRM's be effective in close range situations is that it completly eliminates the need for autocannons. Take an AC 20 vs LRM 20. If i can direct fire my LRM at close range and its missles work. Why would i mount an AC/20. LRM is lighter, has 1 more shot per ton of ammo. Less critical slots and less heat. Oh, and its effective at,essentially, any range. Unless you spread the missiles like crazy at close range all the lrms are going to hit. the clan LRM20 is probably the most rediculous weapon in the whole game.

If you fire a salvo of LRMs at near the min range and the mech you are targeting manages to get inside the minimum range before the missles hit. good for him. the missles didnt arm he doesnt take any damage. Next time you might not shave the shot so close and use your medium lazers instead.

[MaddMaxx]

SilentObserver, on 10 February 2012 - 10:44 AM, said:

Did you really just like your own post?

My problem with having LRM's be effective in close range situations is that it completly eliminates the need for autocannons. Take an AC 20 vs LRM 20. If i can direct fire my LRM at close range and its missles work. Why would i mount an AC/20. LRM is lighter, has 1 more shot per ton of ammo. Less critical slots and less heat. Oh, and its effective at,essentially, any range. Unless you spread the missiles like crazy at close range all the lrms are going to hit. the clan LRM20 is probably the most ridiculous weapon in the whole game.

If you fire a salvo of LRMs at near the min range and the mech you are targeting manages to get inside the minimum range before the missles hit. good for him. the missiles didn't arm he doesn't take any damage. Next time you might not shave the shot so close and use your medium lazers instead.

If the Dev keep the stats pretty much intact, the 6hex or 180m minimum range simply means the Catapult should be used at range for best effect but the 4 ML's can put some hurt on the guy/gal who does get inside the min. and wishes to stay there.

As to the no damage with dumb fire? That sounds a tad harsh. Perhaps some factor of blunt force damage could be applied. Again, the damage model put in place should be interesting if they do deviate with some rules.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 10 February 2012 - 10:57 AM.

[Felix Dante]

SilentObserver, on 10 February 2012 - 10:44 AM, said:

Did you really just like your own post?

My problem with having LRM's be effective in close range situations is that it completly eliminates the need for autocannons. Take an AC 20 vs LRM 20. If i can direct fire my LRM at close range and its missles work. Why would i mount an AC/20. LRM is lighter, has 1 more shot per ton of ammo. Less critical slots and less heat. Oh, and its effective at,essentially, any range. Unless you spread the missiles like crazy at close range all the lrms are going to hit. the clan LRM20 is probably the most rediculous weapon in the whole game.
If you fire a salvo of LRMs at near the min range and the mech you are targeting manages to get inside the minimum range before the missles hit. good for him. the missles didnt arm he doesnt take any damage. Next time you might not shave the shot so close and use your medium lazers instead.

Actually if you look again you will see I had a quote in that post...that was what I was referring to.

The diference between missiles and auto-cannons is pretty obvious: Autocannons put their damage into one Single location while missiles offer a potential of similar damage spread over a mech. However, that is up to the developers at Pirana to figure out the true balance there.
But I agree that Clan LRMs are annoying powerful.