205 replies to this topic

[Grizley]

John Norad, on 07 November 2012 - 05:20 AM, said:

You can't scout anymore, or you can't brawl anymore?
Personally, I prefer scouts being scouts, not close combat specialists.
So while I agree that LRMs are a bit ridiculous right now, I welcome the reduction in zoom zoom knife fighters.

That's kind of a silly statement. The "zoom zoom knife fighters" are a product of role and weight constraints.

Scouts need to be able to cover a lot of ground to scout. So they are light with big engines.

Since the engine is much of the free weight of the mech they have little tonnage for weapon systems. A Jenner runs ~10% of it's weight in weapons. Can you imagine an Atlas with 10 tons of weapons? Yeah...

So, given 4 tons to spend on weapons you can either afford one larger weapon with more range (large laser) or several smaller weapons with shorter range. Given that we have extremely high speed to fulfill the scout requirement the multiple smaller systems with shorter range makes more sense. 8 damage at medium range or 20 at close. No contest.

So scouts will nearly always being engaging from short to extremely short ranges. Due to the combination of speed and short range weaponry.

To bring this full circle around to the LRM boats... the primary weakness of an LRM boat is someone getting inside their minimum range and forcing them to fall back to their secondary weapons. An Atlas could certainly do this job, if the LRM boat does't move (defending a point or whatever) but the much easier solution is use a mech that can cross that 800 meters quickly and then do something about it when they do.

Just in case you missed that, scouts will always prey on support mechs. That is their role. Find the enemy, avoid the heavies, pick on their support. Once the enemy heavies are engaged with your heavies, go stab them in the back, distract them, try to draw fire away from the easy as crap to hit Atlas and make them spin around flailing to try to catch you. Or if they ignore you, carry enough weapons to make them pay.

[Rotaugen]

Allekatrase, on 07 November 2012 - 12:07 PM, said:

Well, according to others LRMs aren't effective in your TEAM game so why would it matter if no one uses them in that setting anyway? The point he's making is that it should be an effective but not overpowering weapon in both settings.

Also, if you're not using LRMs in your teams then you're A. probalby having more fun and B. not using the most effective weapon currently. You can statistically prove they have the highest DPS and the highest damage per ton and you can show in game that with good spotting they don't miss the target anymore. They are, hands down, the best weapon currently.

I don't disagree with toning down LRMs. I disagree with the statement that the game should be changed so that non-team players have the same chance as a team. This is a team game to begin with. When Solaris gets going, maybe that will placate the diehard lone wolves, but don't water down the game just to make lone wolves equal to a team. That's all I was against.

[Allekatrase]

Rotaugen, on 07 November 2012 - 12:46 PM, said:

I don't disagree with toning down LRMs. I disagree with the statement that the game should be changed so that non-team players have the same chance as a team. This is a team game to begin with. When Solaris gets going, maybe that will placate the diehard lone wolves, but don't water down the game just to make lone wolves equal to a team. That's all I was against.

I don't see that as even being an issue. We are nowhere near the point where a single player can take out the entire enemy team alone and that's what it would take. Coordination will always beat rambos. I just don't see how that's even relevant to this discussion.

[Noth]

Rotaugen, on 07 November 2012 - 12:46 PM, said:

I don't disagree with toning down LRMs. I disagree with the statement that the game should be changed so that non-team players have the same chance as a team. This is a team game to begin with. When Solaris gets going, maybe that will placate the diehard lone wolves, but don't water down the game just to make lone wolves equal to a team. That's all I was against.

Guess what, LoL a team game that this game could only dream as being successful as, makes changes that benefit solo players. WoT, another tactical and strategic team game that is very popular also makes changes that benefit solo players. In both, there is no real solo mode, you have drop in with other people. It's also part of good game design.

Successful games do things that benefit the solo player as they are what will compose the majority of the players. You snub them your game in all likelihood is going to crash hard. However you also don't snub the premades either. Thus you want to make thing useful for both yet not overpowering for both.

Edited by Noth, 07 November 2012 - 01:02 PM.

[Purlana]

PGI just said that the OP is wrong, incoming hot-fix to LRMs!

[Allekatrase]

Quote

RussBullock @Sisssisss an hour ago SHARE
Were always analyzing balance. Im currently wondering if were seeing too many LRM's in the air.

Also, this. They may be a little behind, but they may not be completely oblivious.

[Rotaugen]

Allekatrase, on 07 November 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

I don't see that as even being an issue. We are nowhere near the point where a single player can take out the entire enemy team alone and that's what it would take. Coordination will always beat rambos. I just don't see how that's even relevant to this discussion.

One poster (can't remember name) said they should change anything that gives a team an advantage over lone players. I'm all for weapon balance (the topic here), but not for a change just to weaken teams. That's the only point that I am against.

[SwissNoob]

Lowridah, on 07 November 2012 - 05:04 AM, said:

JJ hopping WAS the issue .. why use the mechs legs and do what they are meant for when you could use the cover of a hill and just hop up and down all match. That is not MW/BT

hmmm.. yes.. why they use legs... 4 of 5 games i played 90% of the mechs dont use legs.. just lrms...
it was like this old (atari?)game with the Artillery ...

Yes its possible to avoid ... but... if i had to stay in cover every second.. i cant do my job as an scout... running with 128.6 km/h dont help... so i sit there and wait until the rocketrain is over and maybe i had somthing to do...

and no sitting in a LRMBoat too isnt a way for a real merchwarrior

[Imagine Dragons]

They said in the Kotaku interview that LRM trajectories are not working as intended...

[Noth]

Rotaugen, on 07 November 2012 - 01:08 PM, said:

One poster (can't remember name) said they should change anything that gives a team an advantage over lone players. I'm all for weapon balance (the topic here), but not for a change just to weaken teams. That's the only point that I am against.

You can change a weapon to be useful for teams while weakening it's effect on pugs. This inturn actually buffs the once near useless item for the team while simultaneously nerfing it for pugs. You should want this if you play in teams. If a team still used it against pugs the team would still roll over the pug (it actually doesn't weaken the team at all). If you don't believe it's possible or smart to do I suggest you read up on how champions and items often change in LoL and how it actually betters the game. Balance is not it being over powering in a pug environment and useless in a team match. Balance is when it is useful in both but not over powering in either.

Edited by Noth, 07 November 2012 - 03:00 PM.

[Orion ji]

Even if PGI does change the trajectory, it won't be by much I bet.

Even if they drop the damage per missile to .5 each, it will only mean it will take 1 or 2 more salvos to do what they do now.

Even if they fix the missiles sometimes going through hills, people will still die to them.

Even if they actually make FF armor useful you will still die to them.

[Kraven Kor]

While taking cover and such certainly works, I'm sorry, but LRM's are a "bit much" right now.

[AC]

I really think the OP missed the "Missile Warrior Online" thread. And that was Prior to the patch and Artemus.

[Mister Haha]

Ibrahim al Arkab Hatomoto, on 07 November 2012 - 06:11 AM, said:

....

Let me guess, judging by your username, you're the one that ALWAYS sends the friend requests and forms the group?

[Squarefox]

The 90 degree angle is a bug:
http://kotaku.com/59.../?post=54065235

[Jman5]

Listless Nomad, on 07 November 2012 - 06:21 AM, said:

How my AMS feels following this patch:

haha!

[Stoicblitzer]

I can't believe there are people defending the current LRM implementation.

[Badgerpants]

Lowridah, on 07 November 2012 - 05:19 AM, said:

I was on caustic with my 4 man team last night and was sitting on the enemy's cap as I did a rush around the map. Now im on the cap that has the huge hill in front of it and knew rushing there that they had 2 LRM cats sitting on the hills across the water towards the Caldera. I hugged the wall of the hill while staying inside the cap space and it took 2 volleys from the one cat to kill me. I was in my Cicada with full armor. So plz, tell me how im doing it wrong if im behind cover yet watch LRMs come zipping over a mountain and do a 90 degree turn? Plz OP im waiting ....

I think I killed you that match . I certanly remember a Cicada doing what you described, but, I had LoS for the first salvo and I admit I was surprised when you ducked behind the hill but I didn't lose lock for a few seconds, I think I had a light spotting for me to keep the lock so long but, yes, the trajectory of LRM's needs to be fixed and Artemis IV is moderately insane ATM

[Bishop Steiner]

Noth, on 07 November 2012 - 06:23 AM, said:

If the LRM boats were decent, no one on their frontline should be dead, And most your team would be either dead or severely damage. Grats on getting a few kills while they utterly destroyed your team.

Funny, since we win. And seldom get heavy losses. But hey why talk reason when it's more gratifying, apparently to spend time on here teeth gnashing instead of in game, learning to counter stuff?

Stoicblitzer, on 07 November 2012 - 03:57 PM, said:

I can't believe there are people defending the current LRM implementation.

Defending it? Naw. Just saying people are overstating it. And in many instances, I have seen less with 4 man implementation, since you can't count on the rest of the unit being designed to support and protect you. If we were in full 8 man groups and stuff, it could certainly be overboard. And pointing out that 90% of the time people say "OP" just means they aren't willing to take the time to learn how to defeat it. Just because people get smoked for being a solo hero doesn't make something OP.

[StonedVet]

Badgerpants, on 07 November 2012 - 04:17 PM, said:

I think I killed you that match . I certanly remember a Cicada doing what you described, but, I had LoS for the first salvo and I admit I was surprised when you ducked behind the hill but I didn't lose lock for a few seconds, I think I had a light spotting for me to keep the lock so long but, yes, the trajectory of LRM's needs to be fixed and Artemis IV is moderately insane ATM

Not your fault, you didnt design the weapon.