791 replies to this topic

[Shaddock]

Kaijin, on 10 November 2012 - 10:21 AM, said:

You don't get it. The first-person-shooter crowd is upset about getting damaged by "no-skill" (or "support" - they're interchangeable with this crowd) weapons. Their line of reasoning is any weapon that doesn't place the shooter in direct LOS with the target so return fire can be given is a "support" weapon , and should therefore not do significant damage. So only "no-skill" weapons will fire blanks. Manly direct-fire weapons shoot the real bullets. It's sad - what they're turning this game into, and quite sad that PGI is caving in to them.

LRMs do take skill; which is the part of most of these arguments that annoy me. Out of every weapon on the battlefield the are they only one that requires team work, and can be countered through many different means but are intended as an important tactical layer to the battlefield. If your being hit by LRMs, send in 1-2 scouts to harass the shooters and while they are occupied close distance.

Ways to avoid LRMs, kill the scout spotting you, close to 250m or less, use AMS (especially from more than 1 mech), terrain mask, hide under a bridge, power down, harass the shooter, or cry on the forums.

Ways to avoid a Jenner with craptons of small lasers: Quit match.

Edited by Shaddock, 10 November 2012 - 10:26 AM.

[DrBlue62]

Relkathi, on 10 November 2012 - 10:09 AM, said:

You have obviously never been in the military. As currently one of the most powerful weapons in the military is the M109A6 Paladin, which allows Soldiers to rain metal death from 36,000meters away. If weapons in 3049 can't match that, then why other using them at all.

ATM, LRMs are useless, they aren't a threat to any mech, let alone an Atlas.

LRMs should be 1 point of damage per every missile that hits. If you are dumb enough not to seek cover, then you deserve to die.

Surely you understand this is a game and that a weapon system that does all the work for the user should not be killing enemy players easily. This is not modern combat, running out of cover for thirty seconds shouldn't get you vaporized by missiles. Instead they should be support, softening the enemy up to help your teammates destroy them more easily.

[Dren Nas]

Bagheera, on 10 November 2012 - 10:19 AM, said:

You original statement was that you could not solo-kill an atlas with LRMs from your cat. That, imo, is by design. You should not be able to stand behind cover and solo kill the heaviest mechs in the game in a matter of minutes by facerolling your keyboard.

Simply responding to what you said in your post guy.



We are bringing that up because of the way the OP framed his complaint. That part in bold there is actually sensible and specific. Grounds for a far more useful conversation. AFAIK, the dmg on LRMs was supposed to be set at 1.7. If it has gone lower than that, then either Paul was incorrect, or the hotfix was bugged and they will be back in line shortly.



However, the OP is clearly lementing the loss of that 48 hour window when citing his examples in the first post. Wording is important. Yours is sensible, his was full of tears.

Actually, my original statement was:

Dren Nas, on 10 November 2012 - 09:40 AM, said:

At random times throughout the beta, I would pick a mech and run out in the open, be spotted, and diesoon afterward to the sky falling on top of my head. At others, I would be the one launching explosive death. I learned that to get away from LRMs you use cover and even powerdown randomly to break targeting locks.

Today, I can sit in my catapult and drop hell on an atlas trudging out in the open with my entire 700+ missiles and not even phase him.

It's quite disheartening to the point that I've even taken all LRMs off my Catapults and replaced them with SRMs or SRM Streaks.... or even removed missiles completely replaced with lasers.. or even dual Gauss (lolgausscat).

My point is that since the LRM nurf, there's really no reason to equip them when other long range weapons deal so much more damage. Oh, and before you say something along the lines of "QQmoar" or "That's all he plays", I have an atlas and yen lo wang that I play quite often.

TL;DR: LRMs have been nurfed too hard.

Thought I would highlight the important bits relating to atlases

And, no, I didn't even play for that 48 hours. My gaming buddies told me about it.

[Bagheera]

Kaijin, on 10 November 2012 - 10:21 AM, said:

You don't get it.

No guy, you don't get it. A missle flight path is an arc. Not a "fly direct over target and make right angle turn onto their head." That was my ONLY problem with LRMs No object can fly at the speed of a missle and make a 90 deg turn instantly. Arc, son.

That is, and always will be, my only problem with LRMs. And right now its gone. Bueno. Cover works, breaking lock works, all is right with the world.

If dmg isn't where they said they would set it, that will get figured out. But the flight path was pancaking broken. Anyone who thinks that was OK just wants an easy-mode faceroll weapon.

[RG Notch]

This same crap will happen if they ever decide to balance Gauss rifles, all the people who simply want to use the OP weapon they read about on the forums will be upset when it's no longer as uber as they were told. Same thing happened with pre mades, they can't PUG stomp for a few days and they now come out to whine how the game is ruined. Relax folks if you read enough some one will find a new OP build or weapon to use and you can got back to being as good as you should be.

[Noth]

Shaddock, on 10 November 2012 - 10:24 AM, said:

LRMs do take skill; which is the part of most of these arguments that annoy me. Out of every weapon on the battlefield the are they only one that requires team work, and can be countered through many different means but are intended as an important tactical layer to the battlefield. If your being hit by LRMs, send in 1-2 scouts to harass the shooters and while they are occupied close distance.

Ways to avoid LRMs, kill the scout spotting you, close to 250m or less, use AMS (especially from more than 1 mech), terrain mask, hide under a bridge, power down, harass the shooter, or cry on the forums.

Ways to avoid a Jenner with craptons of small lasers: Quit match.

They don't take skill. I see my team engaged with the enemy, I hold the cursor over the box and click. The only real skill required is that of the spotter and that is only if there is a single spotter.

Before Artemis, it wasn't a tactical choice to counter the LRMs with cover or AMS, it was a must. It strangled the possible tactics that would work and was making the game play stale. Now I see much more varied tactics in each game.

Edited by Noth, 10 November 2012 - 10:30 AM.

[Ghostrider0067]

Kaijin, on 10 November 2012 - 10:21 AM, said:

You don't get it. The first-person-shooter crowd is upset about getting damaged by "no-skill" (or "support" - they're interchangeable with this crowd) weapons. Their line of reasoning is any weapon that doesn't place the shooter in direct LOS with the target so return fire can be given is a "support" weapon , and should therefore not do significant damage. So only "no-skill" weapons will fire blanks. Manly direct-fire weapons shoot the real bullets. It's sad - what they're turning this game into, and quite sad that PGI is caving in to them.

I totally agree. If the bulk of the people playing this game have never seen the power of indirect fired weapons, they need to watch some YouTube videos. The US Army LRMS system is an absolutely devastating weapon and the related mech based LRMs function nearly the same with the exception of having a terminal guidance package.

Support weapons are helpful when used in their specific role: indirect or guided FIRE SUPPORT. The Catapult was never designed as a front line combatant and expected to stand in the open an engage mechs in its weight range that are armed with a variety of energy or ballistic weapons. It's designed to be a stand off combatant to support the combatants who are engaging inside its optimum range envelope and not much else.

While Gauss rifles, PPCs, AC-20s, and heavy lasers are primo, badass hardware, that's not to say that they should get all the glory. Without proper support, all you'll find is your mech on the ground... dead.

[Shaddock]

Bagheera, on 10 November 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

No guy, you don't get it. A missle flight path is an arc. Not a "fly direct over target and make right angle turn onto their head." That was my ONLY problem with LRMs No object can fly at the speed of a missle and make a 90 deg turn instantly. Arc, son.

That is, and always will be, my only problem with LRMs. And right now its gone. Bueno. Cover works, breaking lock works, all is right with the world.

If dmg isn't where they said they would set it, that will get figured out. But the flight path was pancaking broken. Anyone who thinks that was OK just wants an easy-mode faceroll weapon.

I dont think ANYONE is wanting the broken flight paths back, we are arguing that when they did the hotfix to take that back out they also nerfed the damage, drastically. It makes little to no sense to have a system that was fairly balanced but was broken by a bug, and then make a damage reduction based on that bug, in the same hotfix you fixed the bug.

Worst part of it is now people keep using a problem that had a lifespan of 48 hours as a stick to beat anyone that says the current iteration is too weak.

[Dren Nas]

Bagheera, on 10 November 2012 - 10:28 AM, said:

No guy, you don't get it. A missle flight path is an arc. Not a "fly direct over target and make right angle turn onto their head." That was my ONLY problem with LRMs No object can fly at the speed of a missle and make a 90 deg turn instantly. Arc, son.

That is, and always will be, my only problem with LRMs. And right now its gone. Bueno. Cover works, breaking lock works, all is right with the world.

If dmg isn't where they said they would set it, that will get figured out. But the flight path was pancaking broken. Anyone who thinks that was OK just wants an easy-mode faceroll weapon.

Again, lets keep referencing a 48 hour window where LRMs were broken, and let us continue using that for our examples during this discussion.

Edited by Dren Nas, 10 November 2012 - 10:33 AM.

[Noth]

Ghostrider0067, on 10 November 2012 - 10:30 AM, said:

I totally agree. If the bulk of the people playing this game have never seen the power of indirect fired weapons, they need to watch some YouTube videos. The US Army LRMS system is an absolutely devastating weapon and the related mech based LRMs function nearly the same with the exception of having a terminal guidance package.

Here's the thing. This is a game, it needs to be balanced and varied. The game currently has a good variety of builds and tactics in use during matches. I could not say that before the artemis.

[Ghostrider0067]

Noth, on 10 November 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

Here's the thing. This is a game, it needs to be balanced and varied. The game currently has a good variety of builds and tactics in use during matches. I could not say that before the artemis.

Agreed. The problem is, what you consider balanced I might consider OP to a degree and vice versa. The same goes for the dev team. It's just the nature of the beast, unfortunately. While all this is important and relevant to the state of the game as it currently exists, the most important rule as I see it is as follows:

IT IS HOW IT IS. ADJUST YOUR TACTICS.

[Dren Nas]

Noth, on 10 November 2012 - 10:33 AM, said:

Here's the thing. This is a game, it needs to be balanced and varied. The game currently has a good variety of builds and tactics in use during matches. I could not say that before the artemis.

What about the people that were hoping for a mechwarrior game that would be somewhat realistic? If you want a game, I'm sure call of duty is balanced...

[Kaijin]

DrBlue62, on 10 November 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

Surely you understand this is a game and that a weapon system that does all the work for the user should not be killing enemy players easily.

Why not?

DrBlue62, on 10 November 2012 - 10:25 AM, said:

This is not modern combat, running out of cover for thirty seconds shouldn't get you vaporized by missiles. Instead they should be support, softening the enemy up to help your teammates destroy them more easily.

What year are you living in? The year I'm living in - BattleMechs haven't even been built yet.

[Dren Nas]

Ghostrider0067, on 10 November 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

Agreed. The problem is, what you consider balanced I might consider OP to a degree and vice versa. The same goes for the dev team. It's just the nature of the beast, unfortunately. While all this is important and relevant to the state of the game as it currently exists, the most important rule as I see it is as follows:

IT IS HOW IT IS. ADJUST YOUR TACTICS.

And that's why i'm not longer using LRMs XD

[RG Notch]

Dren Nas, on 10 November 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

What about the people that were hoping for a mechwarrior game that would be somewhat realistic? If you want a game, I'm sure call of duty is balanced...

Wait a minute, you seriously saying that players wanted the game to not be balanced? Seriously?

[Ghostrider0067]

Dren Nas, on 10 November 2012 - 10:36 AM, said:

And that's why i'm not longer using LRMs XD

Well, that's your right and your choice. Is it a sound one? I suppose that remains to be seen. I wish you luck all the same.

[Tetatae Squawkins]

Dren Nas, on 10 November 2012 - 10:35 AM, said:

What about the people that were hoping for a mechwarrior game that would be somewhat realistic? If you want a game, I'm sure call of duty is balanced...

Realism in a game of giant robots. Call of duty comparison.

This has all the hallmarks of a good argument.

[Mavairo]

If you took LRMs off your cat, you're doin it wrong. without trying too hard and with a good spotter just burning through my LRM15s I can rack up 200 to 400 damage, at 0 risk to myself.

[Shaddock]

RG Notch, on 10 November 2012 - 10:38 AM, said:

Wait a minute, you seriously saying that players wanted the game to not be balanced? Seriously?

I dont think he means he doesnt want the game to be balanced, he just doesnt want everything equally nerfed into the ground to where the only difference between weapon systems is the graphics.

Edited by Shaddock, 10 November 2012 - 10:40 AM.

[Joseph Mallan]

Dr Killinger, on 10 November 2012 - 09:50 AM, said:

Thing is, there are few boat configurations that can kill an Atlas with impunity, much less so from 1km away. Before the hotfix, an Atlas in the open was dead. Afterwards, it isn't, but this isn't some strange pheonmena that defies logic. An Atlas is tough.

LRMs are still dangerous, but they are now as they should be, a support weapon. They suppress enemies, keep them in cover, and can turn the tide of a battle. LRM support turns a sure defeat into a sure victory. This is very valuable, but difficult to coordinate without great teamwork and focussing targets. This is great, because no LRM boat should be able to solo the toughest mech in the Inner Sphere.

Meet the killer LRM Boat:

Quote

Bane 3[color=#000000] - This design changes the weapons configuration totally. Eight [/color]LRM-15[color=#000000] provide fire support, while sixteen tons of ammunition proves sufficient for the design. A [/color]One-ShotStreak SRM-4[color=#000000] provides one-time close support. Nineteen [/color]double heat sinks[color=#000000] are up to the[/color]

This wastes Assaults in a blink of you eye.