791 replies to this topic

[DrBlue62]

Kaijin, on 10 November 2012 - 10:36 AM, said:

Why not?

They are support, alone they shouldn't be dropping mechs with ease. As many have pointed out, this is a team game. They already accept minimal risk and take ever increasing reward the higher their damage output is. Any aware player being hit by LRM's in the heat of battle is still going to want it to stop as LRMs still do very real damage which puts the enemy mech combatting them at an advantage.

Kaijin, on 10 November 2012 - 10:36 AM, said:

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

Then how would you expect them to be on par with artillery guns that are designed to shoot that far.

[Bagheera]

Shaddock, on 10 November 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

I could be wrong but I thought they were about 1.7 before the hotfix which they stated lowered them.

Nope, they were 2.0 before the hotfix, see the quote I referenced earlier from the Hotfix thread. A player asks for a number to define "reduced slightly" and Paul responds with 1.7.

There are some complaints going around that the dmg is actually lower than that. I'm no genius either, so datamining the xml files will have to be done by someone else (probably already has). Ohmwrecker's last update to his guide as 10/30, so that's no help at the moment.

[Hysteria]

LRMs no longer make you a walking one man hit squad from 1000m away. So what. I believe the game is working very well at the current state after the LRM "nerf". I still use them all the time and they do great damage when paired with artemis. They do pretty average damage relative to other weapons without artemis which is where it should probably be.

Also keep in mind that you might be fighting multiple mechs with AMS systems that overlap and also make your missles seem even more useless. Trust me, they aren't useless. Just buy an artemis and light them up.

Edited by Hysteria, 10 November 2012 - 11:03 AM.

[Tetatae Squawkins]

Shaddock, on 10 November 2012 - 10:59 AM, said:

I could be wrong but I thought they were about 1.7 before the hotfix which they stated lowered them. It feels like they are closer to 1 but I am not a total stat guy and havent dug in to look. I just know the feel of the missiles and the damage they appear to do is below what I think is reasonable.

Edit 1:

If the files are right and they are 1,7 they must have been higher before the hotfix, whatever they were the day we hit open beta I thought was the closest to right we have had.

They were 2.0 before the hotfix.

[Joseph Mallan]

Ok then lets tweak it up to 1.8. Missiles need to be just a bit more scary. 2.0 is over the top (barely). Folks can say how to beat LRMs and be correct. ALl the defenses used vs them work perfectly. BUt i is sad that people can say they are standing in the rain and not caring.

[Greg Djekow]

First: This is BattleTech, not "realistic World War 3". Trying to argue with real world weapon systems won't be really convincing.


Playing the TableTop game a lot on mekwars legends, I use LRMs to soften up my targets. They are good at it. Rip off armor of every location so it can be penetrated by more close range weapon systems. In MWO LRMs work quite like that. They (now) have a spread pattern that causes damage to lots of locations instead of only HD/CT. The limiting factor as i see it is actually the mapsize itself. I suppose if maps were about 10-20% larger, LRM support would have more use since it can stay longer at a distance where you can do damage with your missiles (>200m).

Also, if you want to go with common translation from TableTop to MWO, LRMs should do only 1 dmg / missile and not 1.7
However, I can see why the damage increase was necessary since we all have about double the armor we'd have with table top values. This creates a more melee friendly environment since you can soak up hits closing in without getting destroyed (would happen in the TT this way).

TLDR: LRMs are fine as they are now. And yes, I play some LRM configs.

Edit:
About that Bane... it's a clan mech with clan LRMs, no minimum on them. Of course it eats mechs... till it gets ammo critted.

Edited by Greg Djekow, 10 November 2012 - 11:12 AM.

[Shaddock]

Joseph Mallan, on 10 November 2012 - 11:04 AM, said:

Ok then lets tweak it up to 1.8. Missiles need to be just a bit more scary. 2.0 is over the top (barely). Folks can say how to beat LRMs and be correct. ALl the defenses used vs them work perfectly. BUt i is sad that people can say they are standing in the rain and not caring.

I agree,whatever the change need is isnt drastic, its a slight tweak up that I am arguing for.

[Bagheera]

crabcakes66, on 10 November 2012 - 11:03 AM, said:

They were 2.0 before the hotfix.

Correct. Also, I was incorrect about Ohmwrecker's guide. While the post has not been edited since 10/30, all the files hotlinked in there are marked as up to date as of 11/08. He's listing 1.7 per missle.

Mallan hit it on the head with part of the performance difference being targets playing more cautiously. 1.8-1.9 could be a good place to go. I have to say though, then when my HBK's are getting nailed with LRMs, I still feel it - so idk if the dmg is as bad as people are claiming.

[Hekalite]

I don't think the LRM OP/UP debate can really be settled until after the 20th. With groups limited to 4, it's really hard to see how effective use of LRMs can be in a balanced team. By this I mean two or three missile boats plus at least one scout sighting and tagging. It's rare that you can get enough organized control over the battlefield to set up a defensive line that will really show what the LRMs can do.

I only saw one match last night in the few hours I played, where a team pulled it off (enemy team), and I felt they were still pretty effective. Not instakill effective like before, but the LRMs were definitely damaging enough to turn the tide. I suspect that the only tweak necessary is a slightly greater hit rate or slightly more damage.

I see lots of people saying "it's fine" the way it is now, but I feel like that's a cop out. Without at least trying it out part way between where we are now and where we were last week, how can we know where the proper balance actually is?

And of course after ECM goes in, we will be right back at square one.

[RG Notch]

Dren Nas, on 10 November 2012 - 10:41 AM, said:

Let me clarify, I want a realistily balanced game. Having realisitc support is not over powered. It is realistic. I want a game that's balanced toward realism and how things might actually be in the battlefield. I don't want a game that's just "balanced"... like world of warcraft where everything is homogonized and boring.



Add something useful or shoo troll

It's a game, if things aren't balanced people will play whatever is OP and that's what happens without balance. Balance doesn't mean everything is the same except for graphics, at least in my definition. It means that everything has value and there are risks and rewards to each. You seem to want there to be OP stuff because there are OP things in real life. I don't understand why anyone would play something not OP in your "realistic" scenario, because in reality no one would.

[Talinthis]

UraniumOverdose, on 10 November 2012 - 09:53 AM, said:

Any weapon that allows to sit behind cover 1000M away and still deal damage, should not do a ton of damage. As others have said it's a support weapon for softening up your targets that if played properly presents little risk to yourself. If you want a weapon system that does all the work for you, then live with the fact that you don't get the high damage numbers or the multiple kills per game that brawlers deserve to get.

This. I see lrms as suppressive fire. Massive damage for a fire and forget weapon should be a nono

[Noth]

Hekalite, on 10 November 2012 - 11:11 AM, said:

I don't think the LRM OP/UP debate can really be settled until after the 20th. With groups limited to 4, it's really hard to see how effective use of LRMs can be in a balanced team. By this I mean two or three missile boats plus at least one scout sighting and tagging. It's rare that you can get enough organized control over the battlefield to set up a defensive line that will really show what the LRMs can do.

I only saw one match last night in the few hours I played, where a team pulled it off (enemy team), and I felt they were still pretty effective. Not instakill effective like before, but the LRMs were definitely damaging enough to turn the tide. I suspect that the only tweak necessary is a slightly greater hit rate or slightly more damage.

I see lots of people saying "it's fine" the way it is now, but I feel like that's a cop out. Without at least trying it out part way between where we are now and where we were last week, how can we know where the proper balance actually is?

And of course after ECM goes in, we will be right back at square one.

LRMs will be useless in competitive 8 mans. They have always been useless in competitive 8 mans because they are so easy to counter as an organized team. They need reworked to be useful in competitive 8 mans while not being OP in pugs.

[UraniumOverdose]

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.

THIS. IS. A. GAME.

[T Hawk]

Dren Nas, on 10 November 2012 - 09:41 AM, said:

Why?

If you're going to make such a definitive statement, give us a reason why... and don't say "LRMs are ezmoade!" because they aren't unless some scrub tries to run through a large open area.

How about you try to aim for a change? Please stop calling other players scrubs. The scrub is you, who needs targeted weapons systems to even scratch your opponents.

LRM are not quite where they should be, yes, but the way they were before the hotfix was absolutely ridiculous. Targeted weapons systems should never be as potent as weapon systems that have to be aimed by hand.

Edited by T Hawk, 10 November 2012 - 11:18 AM.

[Sputty]

I turned my C1 into a large laserboat. 3 large lasers is a good amount of firepower for a 65 ton mech and you can fiddle with supporting SRMs or SSRMs if you want some secondaries.

LRMs aren't worth using

Edited by Sputty, 10 November 2012 - 11:19 AM.

[Kaijin]

Greg Djekow, on 10 November 2012 - 11:05 AM, said:

Also, if you want to go with common translation from TableTop to MWO, LRMs should do only 1 dmg / missile and not 1.7

1 point of damage per missile, and direct-fire weapons hit random locations too, as per TT. Let's do it!

[Disbelief]

T Hawk, on 10 November 2012 - 11:16 AM, said:

How about you try to aim for a change? Please stop calling other players scrubs. The scrub is you, who needs targeted weapons systems to even scratch your opponents.

LRM are not quite where they should be, yes, but the way they were before the hotfix was absolutely ridiculous. Targeted weapons systems should never be as potent as weapon systems that have to be aimed by hand.

Oh please. Targeted/non targeted. Its always the same statement. Give the players a targeting laser to lead LRMs. About what would you cry now?

[Hekalite]

Noth, on 10 November 2012 - 11:13 AM, said:

LRMs will be useless in competitive 8 mans. They have always been useless in competitive 8 mans because they are so easy to counter as an organized team. They need reworked to be useful in competitive 8 mans while not being OP in pugs.

As I said, I can't comment how they are now for a full team, but if you think they were useless before then I'm looking forward to meeting you on the field of battle once we move to phase 2.

[Noth]

Hekalite, on 10 November 2012 - 11:23 AM, said:

As I said, I can't comment how they are now for a full team, but if you think they were useless before then I'm looking forward to meeting you on the field of battle once we move to phase 2.

Seeing as the recent tournaments that took place eliminated the LRM teams because they were so easily countered. Yeah, I'd say that they were useless as a damage buff won't change that fact. As for teams that used LRMs for support, they should be just as effective now as then.

[Araxes]

Agreed LRMs as they stand now are pretty worthless. Most mechs just ignore the fire now - people are a lot smarter about dodging after the two days of Artemis craziness, which is great, but when they're being hit by them, they can laugh it off with almost no effect even after sustained salvos. Initial Artmemis implementation was OP, granted, but the way they are now just feels horrible to use, completely ineffective.

They need a buff, real bad.

Edited by Araxes, 10 November 2012 - 11:27 AM.