769 replies to this topic

[Sybreed]

I don't think it's normal that I need to fire 600 missiles just to strip armor off an Atlas. With the nerf, PGI needs to increase the amount of missiles per ton of ammo, otherwise trial mechs are completely useless.

[The Legendary Samurai]

I generally don't use LRMs at all, but I boated all night on patch night (because not boating was pretty much certain death at that point), and then again after the hotfix to finish leveling an Atlas to Master, and I agree. LRMs were OP before patch, REALLY OP after patch, and they are slightly UP now. But, honestly, I'm fine with that.

This is the best LRM balance I've seen so far. It isn't perfect by any means, but it's better than what we had. Maybe they'll tweak them again later on, but I wouldn't call it a priority.

[warp103]

SmithMPBT, on 09 November 2012 - 11:12 AM, said:

I couldn't have explained it better!

the simple answer you do not bring a knive to a gun fight, gun to a rocket fight ,etc,etc. missile are suppose to be better but have draw backs. cost min range heat. If you think about it sooner or later someone will make a better weapon system they are not suppose to nerf it to make you feel better. LRM are to kill and when u run out of ammo then you get owned if u do not have a back up. If you are in the open you are suppose to die not walk thru 720 rounds and kill the guy firing them. Just like if you have a guass u should not able to kill a guy at 1500m if it rated at 1000. Yes once in a while a guy can shoot better then the rating but not joe buttmunch all the time.

I sick of missile are for support. Wrong missile are to kill you so you never get close. Think of a sniper. he kills you if you are range then when ammo gone. If he does not and you are coming then he goes pistol, then if that ammo gone the it back to the K bar,then hand to hand.
Game is the same missiles{sniper rifle} then ballistics{guass/ac20 then lasers{knife},hand to hand {run over other mech}.
Do see the issue DEV basically gutted sniper and hand to hand.

Edited by warp103, 09 November 2012 - 11:54 AM.

[Dimento Graven]

WarMonkey14, on 08 November 2012 - 10:47 PM, said:

well then why the **** should a weapon that does not require careful aim or line of sight be allowed to do the same damage as an ac20, which does require both as well as gets less ammo per ton and weighs way more in tonnage.

so yes it is our opinion, but seriously our opinion makes sense in terms of balance. LRMs not being a support weapon and comparing them in the same category as an AC-20 is ridiculous. if you played battletech, you should feel ashamed of such a statement. I'm ashamed i found it on this forum. Just my opinion

So many thing wrong with this statement I don't think you're playing the same game as I am:

1. While LRM's don't require you to put the little circle exactly on the spot you want before pulling your trigger, you are required to acquire a LOCK before firing the weapons if you the best chance of your missles reaching your target.
2. I fail to see how "line of sight" has anything to do with a weapon's power, but just to educate you a bit: Just because I fire 20 LRMs at you doesn't mean I will hit you with 20 missles. Between any active AMS that you may have or may be near by you, natural "missle attrition", and the state of the missle lock during the entire flight time, it's possible that you might receive ZERO damage. Unlike an AC20, where the second your little targeting circle/hash touches an enemy mech, you can INSTANTLY pull the trigger and are MUCH more likely to land closer to the full 20 points of potential damage, also nearly INSTANTANEOUSLY.
3. LRMs are not just a support weapon, they are a strategic weapon, and if your force happens to bring an overbearing amount of LRMs against an unprepared or unskilled opponent, well so what?

I played TT for years and Mechwarrior on GEnie for YEARS after that, and various other lesser known itterations of BattleTech. I've ALWAYS used LRM's as a primary "long range" weapon.

The ONE advantage that LRM's and Streaks have over AC20's and GAUSS was the target tracking. But for the tracking to work, you have to maintain lock. If lock is broken, and your target is mobile you will probably hit with very few missles, or more probably, none at all.

With AC's and GAUSS if you're leading your mobile target correctly, you just pull the trigger and move on. You don't have to hope the target crosses in front of a hill 3, 4, or 5 seconds after you've launched your AC/gauss rounds. You'll hit, period, and with GAUSS you don't even have to worry about dispersion of your rounds, and neither AC nor GAUSS are affected by AMS, and GAUSS you don't even have to worry about heat, or ammo explosions.

[Dimento Graven]

Rumrunner2, on 09 November 2012 - 08:32 AM, said:

600 missiles to kill an Atlas is exactly how it should be.

600 missiles with 1,7 damage each is 1020 damage sendet. 75% hits makes about 750 real damage.
Atlas has about 600 points armor, about 400 points internal structure, and about 150 hitpoints in installed equipment.
To kill an Atlas u have not only to eliminate his armor, but his internal structure or his engine too.

Because LRMs are spreading there damage all over the mech and dont penetrate a single area the 600 LRMs to kill an Atlas is correct.

After all, the hotfix gave much more fun to the game. LRM spammer times are over .
Now each element in the game, included agility, makes sence.

The problem I have with this statement is that it shouldn't be required to eliminate EVERY shred of armor before getting a kill, and by your logic gauss and lasers are SIGNIFICANTLY over powered because concentrating fire on the head or a torso can quickly result in a kill, leaving 90% of the target 'mech intact.

[Korobug]

Okay, lets look at just the game. Forget tabletop, forget previous mechwarrior games. The devs said they wanted to implement something new, they called it role warfare. Well, support is a role isn't it, what weapons should be considered support. Oh look, there's a weapon you can fire across the entire map, that seems pretty good, they stay safe in the back, protected by their team, and volley, not killing, but supportive fire to help their allies. Well that sounds like a support role to me.

Seriously, look at where the games going, they want people to fill different roles to create well balanced and thought out team compositions. What they're doing is right, if you want to be a brutal killing machine, it's simple, don't use LRM's. The role system is making more sense as they go, and they're doing a very risk vs reward system for it as well. The heaviest hitters take the greatest risks, and the ones who sit far away throwing rocks take the least risk, even less so if your team knows what they're doing. I don't see what's wrong with LRM's being support.

[JediMastaDJ]

Xander86, on 08 November 2012 - 05:57 PM, said:

My thought should be that your spotter should only spot against targets they lock onto ie.... I am a Jenner and I can. See 5 mech but I can only target 1.... the other 4 mechs show up but you either can't get an easy lrm lock or can't lock at all. But the one the Jenner targets would either get an easier lock or be the only one to be able to be locked....

I'm pretty sure that's how it works right now. If I lose target lock on the mech, then the LRM boat loses it as well. I have to have line of sight, as a scout, and maintain a target lock. That means they need to be at least 25% visible or more. Then the LRM boat has to use my target and launch his/her LRMs. Then I need to maintain target lock and visibility as the missiles are incoming or risk the missiles missing. If I lose sight, I need to regain sight of the target before the missiles are incoming. I've actually been able to reacquire a target and TAG him and it redirects the missiles in flight to the mech. Without TAG, the missiles are less likely to redirect in time.

Bru1zer, on 08 November 2012 - 05:06 PM, said:

V true, but we have strayed so far from TT already what does it matter, if I wanted to play TT rules I would be looking at mechwarrior tactics not MWO, I didn't think I needed to mention how spotting currently works, we all know how the game currently plays.

I never played TT I started with MW2 and have played every MW FPS franchise since, I have two master cats and 2 elite jenners I am well aware of how the game currently works from both sides (as a spotter and as battery)

My point is presently you can have 7 missile carriers behind cover and one spotter (not a great team makeup but stick with me), the target gets no indication they are spotted which is all that is required for the other 7 to launch from safety.

If it was changed so the missile carriers required LOS themselves then you wouldn't have LRM only mechs sitting behind cover, they would have to get in the thick of it.

All that is needed is one our scouts to rush behind enemy lines and target the enemy, they have no idea we are there until it's too late, game is over, it's boring.
If the locking mechanic was changed you wouldn't have everyone with LRMS shooting at the first poor sap that gets targeted.

You had 7 LRM boats because LRMs were OP. Now that they've buffed them, you'll see fewer LRM boats on the battlefield and they'll be easier to get away from. If you rush the LRM line or swarm them with light and medium mechs, they die rather quickly. When I played after the patch yesterday, LRMs were a lot less prevalent on the field and easier to deal with.

[Dimento Graven]

TheUnderking, on 09 November 2012 - 10:56 AM, said:

To quote all the LRM boaters over the last two patches : It's fine L2P. It's a SUPPORT WEAPON. Keep your distance, use terrain.

My opinion:
LRMs are fine, they are still the only weapon in game that does 170% of it's tabletop damage value!. If I stand out in the open, I still get wrecked by them. LRMs were stupidly powerful before. I was doing 1300+ damage a game starting in my second drop as an ArtemisLRM catapult.

I need to drop with you then, you're getting very lucky at consistantly getting either very AFK, very STUPID, or very disco'd opponents.

I gave ~1400 damage ONCE, when 2 of the enemy team's players seemed to AFK/disco'd.

Mostly I averaged around 800, which was a nice change of pace after previously only giving 400/500 damage per game.

[Dimento Graven]

Korobug, on 09 November 2012 - 11:49 AM, said:

Okay, lets look at just the game. Forget tabletop, forget previous mechwarrior games. The devs said they wanted to implement something new, they called it role warfare. Well, support is a role isn't it, what weapons should be considered support. Oh look, there's a weapon you can fire across the entire map, that seems pretty good, they stay safe in the back, protected by their team, and volley, not killing, but supportive fire to help their allies. Well that sounds like a support role to me.

Seriously, look at where the games going, they want people to fill different roles to create well balanced and thought out team compositions. What they're doing is right, if you want to be a brutal killing machine, it's simple, don't use LRM's. The role system is making more sense as they go, and they're doing a very risk vs reward system for it as well. The heaviest hitters take the greatest risks, and the ones who sit far away throwing rocks take the least risk, even less so if your team knows what they're doing. I don't see what's wrong with LRM's being support.

Ok so where does that leave gauss and ER weapons, where people can sit WAY back behind everyone else safely firing weapons with less risk than other brawlers, but getting more reward than the missle carriers?

Your definition of 'support role' and "not killing", where the heck do you get that?

[Sprouticus]

I empathize with the semi-OCD need for clean numbers, but in this case I just dont see a way Devs can who whole numbers. Even lowering it to 1.5 would be a problem.

On a related note, I think the balance numbers we will see moving forward wil eventually make non whole numbers the norm rather than the exception. Especially for smaller weapons. (sl/ml/spl/mpl/srm/ssrm/ac2.....maybe even Ac5 and lbx10).

Edited by Sprouticus, 09 November 2012 - 11:57 AM.

[JudgeDeathCZ]

i can say just 2 words and u know which it will be...but i should get ban after it.In TT LRMs are capable of indirect fire.Deal with it and l2p

[Korobug]

Dimento Graven, on 09 November 2012 - 11:56 AM, said:

Ok so where does that leave gauss and ER weapons, where people can sit WAY back behind everyone else safely firing weapons with less risk than other brawlers, but getting more reward than the missle carriers?

Your definition of 'support role' and "not killing", where the heck do you get that?

The gauss and lasers can't hide behind hills while firing, they require a line of sight. They can easily get pelted by other heavy LOS weapons, or someone can flank around to their side and destroy their weapons. You realize if you blow off a guass cannon the player is luck to survive right? They explode when shot. PPC's are UP from what I've heard, I've blitzed someone carrying them, and I have no problem fighting laserboats. Missiles sit behind hills on the opposite side of the map laying supportive fire when they can't receive fire unless a scout goes back and finds them.
Support is a role, look at any final fantasy game, league of legends, even RTS games. Support is supporting the team, not killing the enemies. LRM's currently fulfil that role. People who use gauss and ER weapons are not safe, and a good brawler will still deal more damage. Please state some facts rather than just telling me I'm wrong.

[Ixis]

AvatarofWhat, on 09 November 2012 - 08:18 AM, said:

Lrm's are easy to fire but they are also easy to dodge, especially with the new incoming missile warning. As it stands right now LRM boats dont need to be respected at all except for light mechs. I can charge my centurion straight across the open from 600 meters take several volleys from an LRM boat and then decimate that boat.

|Thats cool for your centurian my friend but jump into an atlas and try that across 600m of open ground and I can assure you that before the patch you wouldn't have made it through the 200m mark before you end up a smoking wreck on the floor.At least now you have some chance if you get caught crossing an open area of getting to cover And before anyone starts on the "well you shouldn't have left cover in the first place" routine,the game is designed so you have to come out of cover sooner or later.The patch is a good one,LRM's are back to being a support weapon instead of "god mode" on the battlefield and as for not doing damage,thats clearly a program bug for the devs to sort out because I can tell you I've taken plenty of damage from LRM's as well as dished some out with them

[warp103]

Korobug, on 09 November 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

The gauss and lasers can't hide behind hills while firing, they require a line of sight. They can easily get pelted by other heavy LOS weapons, or someone can flank around to their side and destroy their weapons. You realize if you blow off a guass cannon the player is luck to survive right? They explode when shot. PPC's are UP from what I've heard, I've blitzed someone carrying them, and I have no problem fighting laserboats. Missiles sit behind hills on the opposite side of the map laying supportive fire when they can't receive fire unless a scout goes back and finds them.
Support is a role, look at any final fantasy game, league of legends, even RTS games. Support is supporting the team, not killing the enemies. LRM's currently fulfil that role. People who use gauss and ER weapons are not safe, and a good brawler will still deal more damage. Please state some facts rather than just telling me I'm wrong.

Again if missile are for support why the frak does every nation use it are the primery weapons platform . Give me a break missile are not support, they are to kill without getting killed. Hell there are more missile kills them gun kills in modern war so the future we go back to clubs lol.

Edited by warp103, 09 November 2012 - 12:10 PM.

[Korobug]

warp103, on 09 November 2012 - 12:10 PM, said:

Again if missile are for support why the frak does every nation use it are the primery weapons platform . Give me a break missile are not support, they are to kill without getting killed. Hell there are more missile kills them gun kills in modern war so the future we go back to clubs lol.

We're talking about the game, balance, and role warfare. Did the developers say they're trying to make a realistic game? No, we're in bipedal tanks for gods sake, do you know how impractical that is. Tanks would win over mechs in real life any day, so don't bring an argument of reality into this.

[Sprouticus]

I am TOTALLY ok with where they are right now, and do NOT think they are useless. If they were tweaked to 1.75 I would not hate it, but if they stay the same Im ok with that too.

[Butane9000]

Sybreed, on 09 November 2012 - 11:17 AM, said:

I don't think it's normal that I need to fire 600 missiles just to strip armor off an Atlas. With the nerf, PGI needs to increase the amount of missiles per ton of ammo, otherwise trial mechs are completely useless.

Agreed, it felt as if I was doing nothing to an Atlas. I hit it with a majority of several direct hit volleys and it's armor was still yellow. Averaging roughly 18-20 missiles a hit is 30.6 damage. He should have been orange or stripped by the end of the third volley.

Thontor, on 09 November 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

I am going by the values listed in the itemstats.xml

Changing from 2.0 to 1.7..

0.3 / 2.0= 0.15

I understand but if you follow my math from what was ingame on my Hunchback LRMs were actually at 2.12 damage not 2.0. So going off that number and not the number from Paul which given the math I was able to calculate from the game itself was wrong. It could also be the game was registering LRMs as 2.12 damage per missile instead of 2. Which means my Alpha damage should have been only 56 to start with not 59.

Edited by Butane9000, 09 November 2012 - 12:17 PM.

[Dealer]

I don't know if anyone else has noticed this. Since the hotfix, if I lose lock while a flight of LRM's are in flight to target, instead of continuing to last know location, as they did before, the drop outta the sky. I have had this happen multiple times. It's to the point I won't fire on any moving mechs anymore as I'll lose lock and the LRM's just plow into the ground at the point I lost lock.

For example: Arctic City map. I'm positioned in C5. Get a lock on something in C7/D7ish area. Roughly 700-800 meters away. Target is moving, I have a lock so I fire. Flight time should be roughly 7-8 seconds. 2 seconds later I lose lock, expecting to get lock again once the target comes out of cover. 3 seconds after launch my entire flight of missiles pile into the ground roughly 300-400 meters away. 1 second after that I reacquire the target. Pre-patch the missiles would still be 1-2 seconds from impact with last known location and I might have had a chance to still it the target. Now, no way it's just a waste of expensive missiles.

[Butane9000]

Thontor, on 09 November 2012 - 12:24 PM, said:

You sure you didn't just have 3 small lasers not two? Every mech with LRMs before this last hotfix showed the proper alpha strike damage with LRMs at 2 per missile.

No I only had 2 Small Lasers.

[Dimento Graven]

Korobug, on 09 November 2012 - 12:01 PM, said:

The gauss and lasers can't hide behind hills while firing, they require a line of sight. They can easily get pelted by other heavy LOS weapons, or someone can flank around to their side and destroy their weapons. You realize if you blow off a guass cannon the player is luck to survive right? They explode when shot. PPC's are UP from what I've heard, I've blitzed someone carrying them, and I have no problem fighting laserboats. Missiles sit behind hills on the opposite side of the map laying supportive fire when they can't receive fire unless a scout goes back and finds them.
Support is a role, look at any final fantasy game, league of legends, even RTS games. Support is supporting the team, not killing the enemies. LRM's currently fulfil that role. People who use gauss and ER weapons are not safe, and a good brawler will still deal more damage. Please state some facts rather than just telling me I'm wrong.

So your team never has their own LRMs then? Your team ONLY carries direct fire weapons? Your team doesn't utilize scouts to fire missles over terrain to hit the enemy missle boats then?

You do realize that if you hit uncased ammo the player is lucky to survive right? Missles explode when shot.

To actually "sit behind a hill" and fire weapons requires good scouts who can maintain target on a particular 'mech all the while being shot at by the enemy. My experience is, even the best scouts have difficulty maintaining target on a 'mech for the full duration of a "lock time" + "flight time" of missles, that is of course, unless the other team is a bunch of morons and ignoring the scout.

No, pretty much when I play my boat, I'm at the top of a hill where I can see as much of the battlefield as possible so that I don't always have to rely on another 'mech maintaining lock, but of course then my ability to fire effectively at a target limited to the range at which it's actually possible to begin a lock. You do realize that if I'm locking my own targets, something I end up having to do about 50% of the time, I'm not firing behind a hill, and I have to maintain LOS, right?

When my group plays against a team doing the "launch missles from behind a hill" thing, we go kill the spotter, or at least send some 'mechs after them to harrass them so that they can't maintain targeting. Problem solved, then those missle boats have to start doing their own targeting too.

You're wrong because your opinions are wrong, and they're wrong because they're based on what you think you understand about OTHER games, which by the way is apparently extremely limited. When I've played those same games, the "support" classes I played, got kills, that is FACT.

Fire "support" is not the same thing as "medical support", which I have to assume is where you're getting your extremely limited definitions, and incorrect opinions from. The fact is that "FIRE SUPPORT" in military terms is blowing the crap out of your enemies, KILLING AS MANY AS POSSIBLE, before the bulk of your troops arrive to carry on the main push.

When the US Navy was blowing the crap out of Iwo Jima, it wasn't to only "wound" the Japanese soldiers or to "slightly damage" their gun emplacements. It was done with the intent of killing absolutely everyone of those guys who wasn't smart enough to find a very deep hole to hide in.

Same thing in COD's various 'support' classes and vehicles. Same thing as TF2 with it's various 'support' classes and weapons.

We're talking a type of support that involves delivering "force" to a target. Not a type of support that delivers care and comfort...

Korobug, on 09 November 2012 - 12:12 PM, said:

We're talking about the game, balance, and role warfare. Did the developers say they're trying to make a realistic game? No, we're in bipedal tanks for gods sake, do you know how impractical that is. Tanks would win over mechs in real life any day, so don't bring an argument of reality into this.

I disagree, but until the military starts building 20 - 100 ton bipedal weapons platforms, we'll never really know for sure, will we?