68 replies to this topic

[Jaded Jasper]

No good reason? And that's part of what makes it so annoying, especially since they just fixed LRM trajectories to something reasonable. Artemis should basically do just what it does for SRMs, which would be plenty of boost considering how deadly LRMs already were.

[Vincent DIFrancesco]

SteelPaladin, on 07 November 2012 - 10:11 AM, said:

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.

Now *this* is something I agree with. I'm not sure why it was incorporated the way it was. I don't think it's a game-breaker. But it is inconsistent with what the system was originally intended for.

[TimoWasTaken]

Played eight games last night in my K2, all Pugs. Two Large lasers, two medium lasers, two machine guns (yes, I know... but my 5 yo. loves them and needs his own button) and AMS.

Every match at the beginning I said "One scout each direction, brawlers come with me, DON'T get spotted".

Then I ran them all the long way around each map, and flanked the enemy missile boats. We won five, lost three. I died six times (but hey, I led the charge), I was never killed by LRMs and in fact never took more than two salvos (usually none) in any one match.

LRMs were not a significant factor for either side, in any of the games.

Draw from this what you will.

[Wildcat]

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.

We have to wait for the ECM to come into Play, and see what effect this has on all LRM systems......

[Zervziel]

I do hope they do something soon. I love brawling so I tend to make my mechs fit that. What I don't like is trying to find hiding spots for my 15 meter tall war machine every thirty seconds. I have no problems with taking cover to avoid a barrage or two, but now it's getting ridiculous. I spend more time hiding and try to close than fighting. The name ought to be Missile Warrior Online because I honestly cannot tell you how many games I've seen where the majority of both teams are pretty much stationary and just unload long range missiles into anyone foolish enough to get in-range. The games are quickly becoming turret matches.

[Sevaradan]

Jaded Jasper, on 07 November 2012 - 09:20 AM, said:

The reload cost is zero. With such massive firepower you do just fine with the free 75% refills.

I do tend to run out after about 4 kills, but generally by that point winning isn't a problem.

I prefer not running out with a 75% ammo load

[Beo Vulf]

Ezrekiel, on 07 November 2012 - 09:08 AM, said:

And you are quite correct at questioning that intelligence. The amount of fanbois posting without having even a basic understanding of the game mechanics and how they depend on each other is astounding, and PGI needs to sift through virtually thousands of clueless postings to get the test feedback they need.

Seeing how they seem to be in time trouble with almost every aspect of the game, that can't be easy for them...



While I *do* agree that ECM should be placed in the game, it should not be a must-have system just so one can play despite the obvious LRM imbalance.

I mean, if every single Mech in the game needs ECM+AMS+enough AMS ammo then every chassis starts basically nearly 5 tons down just to repair bad weapon balance - this hardly sounds like a proper solution

While the missile are not targetable to a specific spot, Artemis has essentially done just that by tightening up the missile spread to the point that they head camp kill mechs with one salvo. It's just plain silly to watch an awesome that is behind cover get spotted, and die with one salvo from 4 mechs before he can LOS the spotter, and yes every single missile hit the head and shoulders no were else.

[Jason1138]

Wispsy, on 07 November 2012 - 09:33 AM, said:

Also at this point it could do anything...blind faith is not a good thing people come on :/

ECM will be area effect so you won't have to have it on every mech

[EbonKitsune]

I'm just going to take a quote from an "Ask the Devs" session on Kotaku....

WardenWolf 5 hours ago SHARE [color=#AAAAAA][/color][/right]
The latest patch (yesterday) changed LRM arcs substantially - something that was not noted in the patch notes. Can you confirm if this was a bug, or if this is intended LRM behavior? If it is intended, what is the counter supposed to be? Cover - even tall buildings or cliffs - is no longer effective in stopping incoming missiles as they simply fly over and then straight down on top of mechs.
[/right][color=#000000]
RussBullock @WardenWolf 5 hours ago SHARE [color=#AAAAAA][/color][/right]
Bug. Got past our process, a failure. That is why Open Beta is so important we need to perfect our processes with a large player base. This should be hot fixed very soon.

This should explain a lot....[/color]