SeDevri, on 04 November 2012 - 10:53 AM, said:
I would like to make a point here.
The Devs have stated that they wish to remain as faithful to the table top game as possible, and while i understand that this is beta, that also means that they need to fix issues that are grossly unbalanced......which LRMs are OP and NOT in keeping with the Table Top by a large margin. Now, ok if they want to keep LRMs damage at what it is then they need to balance it in other ways, which would be fine by me but the point is they NEED TO BALANCE THEM. A few suggestion I've come up with are:
1) Cluster Hit Rules: According to the table top rules(which are the standard by which the game it base) missile weapons should, on AVERAGE, be able to only hit with about 60% of the missiles fired. Note that this is a HARD NUMBER based on an average die roll of 2D6(ie 7). That would mean that most times you fire with an LRM5/10/15/20 you would only hit with 3/6/9/12 missiles(subjectively). At the moment LRMs hit with a FAR higher % of missiles per shot(assuming you aren't launching your missiles into a hill).
2) AMS: AMS currently does NOT function as it does in the Table Top game(and no i'm NOT expecting an exact port you understand). In the Table Top game an ASM reduces the number of missiles that hit from the Cluster Rules by -4(ie you roll 2D6-4 to see how many missile would normally hit). This would effectively reduce the MAXIMUM number of missiles to about 66.66666% (ie. LRM5/10/15/20 you would only hit with 3/6/10/13 missiles), while the AVERAGE number of hits would be reduced to 1/3/4/5 missiles(rounded properly).
This would go a HUGE way toward balancing them properly at there current damage. I hope this gives people some perspective on exactly how effective LRMs are actually supposed to be. As i say, I'm not expecting and exact port from table top, but if that's supposed to be the BASIS for this games build then i believe it should reflect that at least a little more closely.
Can you imagine the outrage LRM-platform users would have over clustered hits OR TT-ported AMS? "Hey guys, all we need is 3 AMS and then stay in a group, LRMs won't even touch us!". Yeah, ******* amazing. 3 AMS working as multipicative stacks (the LESS painful option - additive would mean 99% reduction) would mean that for every 20 LRMs fired, 5 get through. 5. *********. Missiles. For only 4.5 tonnes on the enemy team. I don't think so.
Clustered hits would be nearly as bad. "Let me just fire off a couple salvos (of 20x2 LRMS).... WTF? HE TOOK NO TORSO HITS? THIS IS ********!". Again, no thanks, I don't need bad mechanics to artificially nerf my weapons. AMS is good vs. single salvos of LRMs, and bad when it gets flooded. People are currently flooding AMS systems with too many targets.
I posted this in another thread, and it's worth saying:
I think the actual problem here is: there are no proper "anti-LRM" maps. By this, I mean all 4 maps we have as of right now have open areas that are perfect for LRM platforms to maximize thier potency (conversely, this makes it easier to snipe them too). We don't have any maps that are specifically detrimental to the usage of LRMs (caverns, Metropolises, mountains&valleys, etc), which may be throwing the data a bit. I expect that as soon as we get some of these maps, LRM usage will decrease in favour of shorter range weaponry, and when longer range direct-fire weapons are brought to balanced conditions, it will stabilize LRM platform usage at acceptable levels.
2
