769 replies to this topic

[Jun Watarase]

I played about 10 games after the hotfix and LRMs with artemis are poinless now.

3 tons of LRM artemis ammo consistently gives me ~300 damage. For a weapon system that weighs 7 tons for a LRM-15 + 2 tons of lrm ammo each + 1 ton of artemis + rearm costs of 15k per ton, this is pathetic. I might as well be boating med lasers and coring mechs in 3-4 alpha strikes, without ammo limitations or rearm costs. Even when my targets are brain dead and wide out in the open, a volley of 30 LRMs just tickle them. For crying out loud, 30 LRMs with artemis = 1 or 2% damage to an atlas...you can expend 2 tons of ammo and just annoy him.

The arcing change means that you no longer need to actively seek cover....as long as you are somewhere near a hill, building or other obstacle, the LRMs will hit it instead of you. Pre-artemis, you needed to either find a large obstacle, or hug a smaller one. No hugging is needed now. Unless you are brain dead and standing in the open, you cannot be hit by LRMs.

It is no longer possible to use LRMs as long range indirect fire support because they are practically guaraneed to hit an obstacle. I had to consistently close to less than 500 meters meters, at which point people rush me and it turns into a med laser brawl fest.

The cost of ammo reloads was, and still is, unworkable. Even with founders and premium bonuses, a 60k rearm bill (for 4 tons of LRM artemis) is a HUGE hit to your wallet. That is approximately 25% of a win, including founders and premium bonus. Pre-hotfix, even doing 1000 damage and carrying your team did not help, since that is only 10k extra c-bills.

IMHO, i think a simple fix to rearm costs would be to remove the 75% free ammo BUT make amm ocosts much cheaper...e.g. 10% of what they are now. The goal is to bring ammo using weapons in line with energy ones where people don't look at the rearm bill and go "what am i doing? i should be boating lasers instead".

[Adrienne Vorton]

they feel okay now... i played them, and i got hit by them...from both sides they just seem to be fine now...thx for the quick fix btw^^

[Xenroth]

Jun Watarase, on 08 November 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

I played about 10 games after the hotfix and LRMs with artemis are poinless now.

3 tons of LRM artemis ammo consistently gives me ~300 damage. For a weapon system that weighs 7 tons for a LRM-15 + 2 tons of lrm ammo each + 1 ton of artemis + rearm costs of 15k per ton, this is pathetic. I might as well be boating med lasers and coring mechs in 3-4 alpha strikes, without ammo limitations or rearm costs. Even when my targets are brain dead and wide out in the open, a volley of 30 LRMs just tickle them. For crying out loud, 30 LRMs with artemis = 1 or 2% damage to an atlas...you can expend 2 tons of ammo and just annoy him.

The arcing change means that you no longer need to actively seek cover....as long as you are somewhere near a hill, building or other obstacle, the LRMs will hit it instead of you. Pre-artemis, you needed to either find a large obstacle, or hug a smaller one. No hugging is needed now. Unless you are brain dead and standing in the open, you cannot be hit by LRMs.

It is no longer possible to use LRMs as long range indirect fire support because they are practically guaraneed to hit an obstacle. I had to consistently close to less than 500 meters meters, at which point people rush me and it turns into a med laser brawl fest.

The cost of ammo reloads was, and still is, unworkable. Even with founders and premium bonuses, a 60k rearm bill (for 4 tons of LRM artemis) is a HUGE hit to your wallet. That is approximately 25% of a win, including founders and premium bonus. Pre-hotfix, even doing 1000 damage and carrying your team did not help, since that is only 10k extra c-bills.

IMHO, i think a simple fix to rearm costs would be to remove the 75% free ammo BUT make amm ocosts much cheaper...e.g. 10% of what they are now. The goal is to bring ammo using weapons in line with energy ones where people don't look at the rearm bill and go "what am i doing? i should be boating lasers instead".

You kind of speak out of my heart. Even if the facts you are saying sound like QQ its the poor truth

[Scratx]

Actually, the cost to upgrade to Artemis is merely the cost of buying the launchers and ammunition to replace those you got installed already. It's not a set amount.


Edit: I won't comment on actual missile performance because I'm yet to play the new patch.

Edited by Scratx, 08 November 2012 - 02:11 PM.

[TB Freelancer]

Blood Skar, on 08 November 2012 - 12:21 PM, said:

How do you think they are underpowered? I am spotting for my team and i see salvo after salvo still ripping through Mechs - i saw a hunchback go down in literally about 10 seconds.

I think they are just right now.

Scouts can duck behind cover IF they respond to the 'Incoming Missle' message and are near enough cover.
Damage still seems high.

I think LRM just hit the sweetspot. IMO anyway..anyone agree ?

I think a lot of the LRM boaters just got used to clicking the second they had a lock regardless of where the opposing mech was fully expecting to do vast amounts of damage. Many boaters just don't know how to play the game well.

Seriously, I can't count the times I've spectated a boater run out of ammo or have a mech get inside the LRMS minimum range and just get torn apart because the boat was still trying to use LRMS, shooting lasers wildly off target, hell I don't think they even realize what the 'o' or 'x' recitals are for.

I just got home from work, so I haven't tried the hotfix yet, but I suspect that in proper hands the LRM boats are still a competitive configuration.

[dal10]

I think lrms should get a slight buff up to 1.8 damage a missile, they are slightly, note SLIGHTLY, underpowered at the moment. the 1.8 damage should be enough to correct this SLIGHT imbalance.

[costi]

Jun Watarase, on 08 November 2012 - 01:38 PM, said:

I played about 10 games after the hotfix and LRMs with artemis are poinless now.

3 tons of LRM artemis ammo consistently gives me ~300 damage. For a weapon system that weighs 7 tons for a LRM-15 + 2 tons of lrm ammo each + 1 ton of artemis + rearm costs of 15k per ton, this is pathetic. I might as well be boating med lasers and coring mechs in 3-4 alpha strikes, without ammo limitations or rearm costs. Even when my targets are brain dead and wide out in the open, a volley of 30 LRMs just tickle them. For crying out loud, 30 LRMs with artemis = 1 or 2% damage to an atlas...you can expend 2 tons of ammo and just annoy him.

The arcing change means that you no longer need to actively seek cover....as long as you are somewhere near a hill, building or other obstacle, the LRMs will hit it instead of you. Pre-artemis, you needed to either find a large obstacle, or hug a smaller one. No hugging is needed now. Unless you are brain dead and standing in the open, you cannot be hit by LRMs.

It is no longer possible to use LRMs as long range indirect fire support because they are practically guaraneed to hit an obstacle. I had to consistently close to less than 500 meters meters, at which point people rush me and it turns into a med laser brawl fest.

The cost of ammo reloads was, and still is, unworkable. Even with founders and premium bonuses, a 60k rearm bill (for 4 tons of LRM artemis) is a HUGE hit to your wallet. That is approximately 25% of a win, including founders and premium bonus. Pre-hotfix, even doing 1000 damage and carrying your team did not help, since that is only 10k extra c-bills.

IMHO, i think a simple fix to rearm costs would be to remove the 75% free ammo BUT make amm ocosts much cheaper...e.g. 10% of what they are now. The goal is to bring ammo using weapons in line with energy ones where people don't look at the rearm bill and go "what am i doing? i should be boating lasers instead".

Quoted for truth.

[Ulvar]

well give it some time. artemis lrm dmg seems a little bit low now but its better than before where you could kill an atlas with 120 lrm's. actually it seems lower than normal lrm's before the patch. right now artemis lrm's are a support weapon with the weight and heat of a main weapon. increase the dmg somehow slightly and it will be fine.

[Grimtooth]

I've played a couple of rounds with LRM's. A LRM 15-20 on table top usually scores around half to 2/3rds of the missles on an average roll.

Artemis adds +2 to the die roll of 2D6, making it 2D6+2, now the average roll on 2d6 = 3 and 4 for a 7. Now +2 bumps the average roll to 9, giving you an average of 2/3rds of the missles in flight.

LRM 15 is around 11 missles, LRM 20 is around 15 missles, don't have a chart handy and haven't played TT in about 14 years.

The issue is this. You randomize the locations where you are hit on a mech. LRM's tend to follow this, also SRM's.

The biggest issue is that you can add Trip AC2's in game or dual guass and the next thing you know you have someone shooting the same spot over and over again, before a heavier mech can actually move.

I should not be able to be cored to death by an ac 2 in an atlas before 2 lrm 15's with artemis kill him. Same goes for dual guass, in table top, you roll 2d6 per weapon scored and it randomizes where the shot goes, here - you hit where you generally aim.

Issues are - Flight time for Cannon weapons and PPC's - they are supersonic weapons that travel 1k meters in a fraction of a second. I shouldn't have to lead a mech as much as we do. With lag thrown in from the servers, you get wierd, and wonky affects.

LRM was a weapon that would help equalize on the lag. Did they get extrememly deadly there for a bit, yes. But maybe you need to do several things.

Reload times on AC2, 5, 10, 20, guass, need to be normalized. This super long range mg ability of dual ac5 ultra is bad, the trip ac2 machine gun is horrid - you have someone with a good connection, and they eat people alive.

The long burn time of lasers. We're I understand that you are following the mechwarrior games that basically followed solaris rules, but common! Most of us are trying to relive our table top experiences.

---

[WM Atimar]

Great post Xenroth, I feel the same way.
Just to add my POV here I think the 75% free ammo should be reduced to 25% and I have no issue with the cost of ammo being high if the damage output stayed high.
people would stop using LRMs because they wouldnt be 75% free and you would have to make all shots count.
it would apply to the gauss K2s as well. if AMMO cost for the high damage weapons was high. very few would use or abuse the system IMO.

[costi]

I'd leave the damage as it is, but give them a slightly more steep flight path. Not the 90-degree overkill, but the final drop towards the target should be at a steeper angle than it is now, so that the weapon actually has some indirect fire capability and avoiding them isn't such a no-brainer.

[Shimmering Sword]

For those that haven't thought of it this way yet:

Break the direct correlation between in match ammo bin counts and mechlab re-arm costs. Stop thinking "gotta reload every match so I'm going in with full ammo". Instead...
75% ammo is the standard volume, this is what faction/merc supply lines are providing you for battle. Should you wish to enter the battle with additional ammo you can throw in some extra cbills, this is the re-arm cost.
Almost every non weapon piece of equipment you put into your mech comes in 2 options: "Standard", and "higher in game performance at a higher maintenance cost". XL engines, FF armor, Endo structure, and if you think of it this way, Ammo.

So, stop QQing about ammo costs and instead start making the choice. Do you want more ammo in a match per ton, or do you want a cheaper re-arm bill?

[Firesteel]

I've also noticed that on any moving targets, LRMs seem to miss far more than they used to. I now have trouble hitting catapults with LRMs even though they go an average speed. I can understand not hitting things going over 100 kph, but now they are only able to consistently hit assaults, with both Artemis and without.

[Tokra]

Artemis missles are a bit expensive.

But you forget something. LRMs are support weapons. Not stand alone own everything ones as they were.

You support with these in a fight without getting in danger. They are perfect for this right now (imo). From the matches today they were still annoying to scouts (up to deadly) if you have a good spotter.

But the rearm cost is to high for it.

[Scratx]

After first impression, LRMs are indeed no longer dominating.

I'm not sure whether Artemis' effect is worth the cost, though. Bit hard for me to see how it's improving, or not, missile spread.

[KidGloves]

I agree that Artemis LRMs could do with being a bit cheaper. Other than that, I'm fine with the LRM fixes. I'm noticing Artemis vs. non-Artemis, and I like the tighter groupings. But the cost is pretty prohibitive.

I've taken myself down to just 2 tons of LRM ammo now, and am being a lot more careful about picking my shots.

[RragnarR40k]

Fine that you played battletech for 25 years but the game is not a tt game and it needs some semblance of balancing. So lrm change was needed. They actually call this game Mechwarrior online and not LRMwarrior online...

/end of story...!

[Thepotatomasher]

one thing everyone is failing to mention is the critical chance of destroying internals. so what..you're not getting tons of kills, but that doesn't mean you're not knocking out criticals.

[Taron]

That patch was one of the best patches ever. What do you fear? Loosing your "Hero"-State?

[Ulfried Tohrsson]

I must say that this patch was very fine. I think the LRM are now good.