68 replies to this topic

[Jaded Jasper]

Psykosis, on 07 November 2012 - 09:36 AM, said:

All the alarmists, extremists, self-entitled chicken littles need to realize that this is <ahem> testing....yup. In case you're curious (I am), they seem to start at one extreme, gather data, move to the other extreme, gather data, and start balancing. Everything goes under this type of testing balance.

The brutal vertical descent LRMs were already tested earlier in closed beta and found to be too much -- now they're back to the same thing only with increased damage, tighter spread, and less effective AMS.

This isn't some organized data gathering, it's simply a mistake.

Edited by Jaded Jasper, 07 November 2012 - 09:45 AM.

[MiG77]

About LBX pellets. IIRC single pellet do 1,2p damage, so damage is increased compared to TT values.

[Noth]

Vincent DIFrancesco, on 07 November 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

What? Now you're just insulting me.

I get shot at. I see the BIG WARNING sign. Having a good idea where the missiles are coming from I move behind cover. I hear the missles hit the cover and my armor doesn't flash or show signs of new damage. This happened consistently throughout the games I played last night. So, there are some possibilities:

a) The cover is working.
Somehow I managed to play 20+ games in a row with no opponent LRM shooter using Artemis.
c) I'm insane. [And I'm not discounting this. I've been called insane before. ]

So, barring insanity, I'm not wrong. I don't care what the graphic looks like. I care about the result. And the result has been, time and time again, that cover has worked to keep my butt alive.

Actually the picture on the previous page proves you wrong. IT clearly shows that nothing but the tallest cover in teh game will save you from Artemis LRMs (and you still need taller cover than before for the regular LRMs).

MiG77, on 07 November 2012 - 09:44 AM, said:

About LBX pellets. IIRC single pellet do 1,2p damage, so damage is increased compared to TT values.

Nope they do 1 damage per pellet for a total of 10 damage overall.

[Vincent DIFrancesco]

Noth, on 07 November 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

Actually the picture on the previous page proves you wrong. IT clearly shows that nothing but the tallest cover in teh game will save you from Artemis LRMs (and you still need taller cover than before for the regular LRMs).



Nope they do 1 damage per pellet for a total of 10 damage overall.

Then why is cover still working for me? THe graphic is irrelevant if the effect is still missiles hitting the cover instead of the target.

Edited by Vincent DIFrancesco, 07 November 2012 - 09:47 AM.

[Jaded Jasper]

Vincent DIFrancesco, on 07 November 2012 - 09:43 AM, said:

What? Now you're just insulting me.

I get shot at. I see the BIG WARNING sign. Having a good idea where the missiles are coming from I move behind cover. I hear the missles hit the cover and my armor doesn't flash or show signs of new damage. This happened consistently throughout the games I played last night. So, there are some possibilities:

a) The cover is working.
Somehow I managed to play 20+ games in a row with no opponent LRM shooter using Artemis.
c) I'm insane. [And I'm not discounting this. I've been called insane before. ]

So, barring insanity, I'm not wrong. I don't care what the graphic looks like. I care about the result. And the result has been, time and time again, that cover has worked to keep my butt alive.

I'm guessing you played earlier in the night, and mostly faced trial mechs with normal LRMs, or that their lock was lost at the last second because they spotted poorly.

I can simply tell you that from the perspective at the other end of the barrel, hiding behind cover didn't save anyone I LRM'd. The only thing that saved them was if I lost lock. Sure, cover helps you lose lock, but vs. a decent spotter it doesn't save you.

[Edit] Oh, and roofs of course. Hiding under a bridge or dock or tunnel definitely helps!

Edited by Jaded Jasper, 07 November 2012 - 09:53 AM.

[MiG77]

Noth, on 07 November 2012 - 09:46 AM, said:

Nope they do 1 damage per pellet for a total of 10 damage overall.

Then that is changed from closed beta. They did 1,2p damage in there in later stages.

[Jaded Jasper]

MiG77, on 07 November 2012 - 09:50 AM, said:

Then that is changed from closed beta. They did 1,2p damage in there in later stages.

There was some talk of that, but I don't think such a change was ever made. They tightened the spread a bit, but that was it.

[MiG77]

Jaded Jasper, on 07 November 2012 - 09:52 AM, said:

There was some talk of that, but I don't think such a change was ever made. They tightened the spread a bit, but that was it.

They did increase it. I checked file myself (in beta).

[Noth]

MiG77, on 07 November 2012 - 09:50 AM, said:

Then that is changed from closed beta. They did 1,2p damage in there in later stages.

They never did 1.2 damage, only tightened the spread.

Edited by Noth, 07 November 2012 - 09:53 AM.

[Vincent DIFrancesco]

Jaded Jasper, on 07 November 2012 - 09:48 AM, said:

I'm guessing you played earlier in the night, and mostly faced trial mechs with normal LRMs, or that their lock was lost at the last second because they spotted poorly.

I can simply tell you that from the perspective at the other end of the barrel, hiding behind cover didn't save anyone I LRM'd. The only thing that saved them was if I lost lock. Sure, cover helps you lose lock, but with a decent spotter it doesn't save you.

Started last night around 11pm EST, IIRC. Not sure if you would consider that early or not.

And if I only played a couple games I could see it just being a case of facing nothing but trial mechs. But it wasn't a few games. And it wasn't just a few times I had success. And I did work it from both ends of the barrel. There is a marked improvement. But the counters I've used before still seem to work just fine. Only thing that's changed from what I seen is the margin of error. You screw up on approach or ignore the threat of LRMs and you have less chance of surviving your mistake.

[MaddMaxx]

Jaded Jasper, on 07 November 2012 - 09:22 AM, said:

No, they don't. Stack Artemis and Tag and the LRMs group tighter at anyting beyond 60m range.

Can you provide empirical data supporting that Stacking status? If you won't or can't please stop spewing such unmitigated bs. Thanks

[Jaded Jasper]

MaddMaxx, on 07 November 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

Can you provide empirical data supporting that Stacking status? If you won't or can't please stop spewing such unmitigated bs. Thanks

Oh *******. Can you provide empirical data for your position? No, then "please stop spewing such unmitigated bs".

Killing Atlases with LRM cockpit damage is plenty of "empirical data" for me.

Edited by Jaded Jasper, 07 November 2012 - 09:56 AM.

[Lin Shai]

GioAvanti, on 07 November 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

This isn't a L2P issue this is a bad game issue.

May I offer that it's actually both?

We won easily 90% of our matches last night, and they all had LRMs raining from the sky. You can "L2P" your way around it. Mainly it involves having better scouts than the enemy, really knowing the maps / cover, taking out their scouts, and then getting your scouts on their LRM boats.

Quote

I love this game.... but wow the fact that *anyone* thinks this is okay makes me question their basic intelligence.

This is the part where it's both. Just because you can play the game this way doesn't make it ok. It's simply not any fun.

Same thing, over and over. It's boring and somewhat annoying right now when half the team is missile boats (we'd bring one or two, then one or two of the PUGs filling in would be running them) and everyone is afraid to step out from behind whatever it is they're behind.

[Icebound]

This game used to be fun =/

[Jaded Jasper]

MiG77, on 07 November 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

They did increase it. I checked file myself (in beta).

Damage is all caculated server side, and there is no local file you can check. Sure, numbers are listed locally -- but they're not the ones actually used.

[Noth]

Jaded Jasper, on 07 November 2012 - 09:59 AM, said:

Damage is all caculated server side, and there is no local file you can check. Sure, numbers are listed locally -- but they're not the ones actually used.

Even the datamined numbers never showed 1.2 damage according to all the charts that were updated through CB.

[Zerikin]

Sevaradan, on 07 November 2012 - 09:12 AM, said:

you do know that reload cost for an artemis boat is 90-150k per game

Unless you go with 75% ammo for free and it costs you nothing.

[Celticon]

GioAvanti, on 07 November 2012 - 08:57 AM, said:

The risk reward for LRMs with artemis IV has virtually no risk.... and no other weapon in the game can match the reward.


LRMs were never meant to do 2 dmg per missile... "Oh but this isn't table top" well then why does a gauss do 15 dmg? why does a med laser do 5? ... you can't keep some values and throw others out the window.

Also the spread has now tightened.... and more missiles hit with artemis....

Really?

This isn't a L2P issue this is a bad game issue. I love this game.... but wow the fact that *anyone* thinks this is okay makes me question their basic intelligence.


Mark my words: If this isn't nerfed quickly this game will be played by about 100 people (which if that's what PGI wants then cool).

LRMWarrior Online.

100% sign

[MiG77]

Noth, on 07 November 2012 - 10:00 AM, said:

Even the datamined numbers never showed 1.2 damage according to all the charts that were updated through CB.

I looked files myself. They were 1,2p per pellet. Il check them again myself from this verison when Im home.

[SteelPaladin]

My question is... Why does Artemis buff indirect fire at all? It was always just a DIRECT fire improvement module. TAG/NARC were what you wanted to help indirect fire.