791 replies to this topic

[Grizley]

Percival Hasek, on 14 November 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

Well, if you have artemis, all of your ammo has ot be Artemis. What are you supposed to do--take the stupidly low amounts of amo you see on trial mechs. With the pathetic damage of LRM's, you have to make up in volume of rapid fire. That requires heat sinks, and lots of ammo. if you dont take a lot of ammo, you are soon dry, left with no weapons--or a few popgun lasers on a slow 'mech. Its a losing proposition either way with LRM's. Given the huge costs you start relying on the 75%free ammo, and to boost that up so at 75% you get enough to cover most of a fight, you have to strip out items for..more ammo slots. Basically, the state of the game now is punishing players taking LRM's. Less damage, more cost, and a fairly futile weapon against fast movers.

It's not punishing players for taking LRMs. It IS punishing people for boating to the point they do nothing every match but fire off 20 tons of LRM ammo.

I don't want to see an ultra long range auto hitting weapon being the dominant weapon in the game. If you think it should be then we'll just agree to disagree.

BTW, you're not forced to take an Artemis system.

[xxx WreckinBallRaj xxx]

Grizley, on 14 November 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

You see extreme reload costs when you're buying 10 tons of Artemis LRMs every match. That could be a gentle hint that you're not really intended to do that.

You CAN do that, but it doesn't mean it's ideal.

How much Hunchback Ps do you see carrying 6 large lasers? They could...

I have 7 stacks, but repair cost has nothing to do with whether I'm supposed to do it or not. If your stance is that people shouldn't use LRMs, then the game shouldn't have LRMs at all. You have the logic wrong. They increased the ammo cost because they don't want you to get a free pass on repairs by sitting back at long range and never getting hit in a match. The issue is that they jacked it up too high. It's not that you "aren't" suppose to use them... the cost is simply screwed up.

[Tuoweit]

Grizley, on 14 November 2012 - 01:18 PM, said:

How much Hunchback Ps do you see carrying 6 large lasers? They could...

I tried 4 PPCs in mine once, it was fun for one match.. now I'll have to try large lasers, damn you

Edited by Tuoweit, 14 November 2012 - 02:11 PM.

[JayVrb]

Bluten, on 14 November 2012 - 01:10 PM, said:

The issue with LRMs is the repair cost. My Catapult spends over 100k in repair costs even if he wasn't hurt. My Atlas can be entirely DESTROYED and not even hit 100k to fix. How the hell does this make sense? So they aren't bad at damage and are fun to use... but as far as profitable money making goes... they suck. Losing half your win reward to repairs when you were barely scratched = NOT COOL. I can make 250-300k in an Atlas and average about 70-80k in repairs. My Catapult nets me less than 250k usually and always 100k+ in repairs. Wtf?

This was my problem before they were nerfed. I haven't played since the nerf so i can't even imagine how depressed i'll be when factoring in the damage-to-repair cost ration

[Grizley]

I don't think they should remove LRMs.

Lets look at an example. You have an Atlas with an LRM20, he goes through a ton, maybe two of ammo per match. Pays 10k or whatever per ton to reload. He is getting good value for using the LRM.

Now if you extend that out to a Cat C4 who is burning through 10-20 tons of Artemis LRM ammo per round. He is using advanced ammo so he pays 15k a ton or whatever and is looking at 150k in ammo cost. He is not getting good value.

I think this is perfect. It's a viable weapon system without being gamebreakingly overpowered when boated. What else do you want? Hell they even let you boat it like crazy if you either add more ammo than you need so you just take the free 75% or you plunk down the money and go all Macross with missile alpha strikes all games.

Tuoweit, on 14 November 2012 - 02:11 PM, said:

I tried 4 PPCs in mine once, it was fun for one match.. now I'll have to try large lasers, damn you

I love the oddball configs.

4 ERPPCs in a Cicada makes me laugh. The idea of a medium mech slowly trundling around and landing 50+ point alphas at large laser range gets at least a snicker.

[JayVrb]

Grizley, on 14 November 2012 - 02:03 PM, said:

It's not punishing players for taking LRMs. It IS punishing people for boating to the point they do nothing every match but fire off 20 tons of LRM ammo.

I think a lot of people fail to realize the cost tradeoff of firing off "20 tons of LRM ammo". I had a generalist Cat build w/ LRMs, Streaks, and Medium lasers and my rearm/repair bill was MINIMUM 80k every match. That is a FAT tradeoff in my opinion.

Oh and btw, that was before the damage nerf. So now the tradeoff is even less worth it.

[Percival Hasek]

Grizley, on 14 November 2012 - 02:03 PM, said:

It's not punishing players for taking LRMs. It IS punishing people for boating to the point they do nothing every match but fire off 20 tons of LRM ammo.

I don't want to see an ultra long range auto hitting weapon being the dominant weapon in the game. If you think it should be then we'll just agree to disagree.

BTW, you're not forced to take an Artemis system.

I never said that. They shoudl be a significat weapon, fairly costed. They are neither at this moment.

And no one is shooting off 20 tosn of ammo---no one can afford to do that. But if you bring less than 3-4 tons per launcher, (depends onthe map and the rate of fire you can sustain due to heat) you'll run dry early into the match, unless you lower your rate of fire to the point you may as well not be in the game.

[Grizley]

See you think they're not fairly costed, I think they are. That's a difference of opinion.

This primarily comes from the fact that I use LRMs as a secondary weapon, not a primary weapon. 2 tons of LRM20 ammo lasts all match for me and still does significant damage, all without the bother of aiming.

You use LRMs as a primary (and sole) weapon and want the potential to deal over 1000 damage a match with LRMs. That's a valid choice but it's going to be expensive.

You seem to like the idea that every match has 4-6 missile boats, I loathe it. Again a difference of opinion. However in this case PGI has stated that they want to make the typical range of engagement short to medium range. So I agree with PGI and you don't. I think it's far more exciting to get within 300m of a target than it is to spam LRMs at a red box.

[Kaijin]

Grizley, on 14 November 2012 - 02:03 PM, said:

It's not punishing players for taking LRMs. It IS punishing people for boating to the point they do nothing every match but fire off 20 tons of LRM ammo.

I don't want to see an ultra long range auto hitting weapon being the dominant weapon in the game. If you think it should be then we'll just agree to disagree.

BTW, you're not forced to take an Artemis system.

I only carried 5 tons of Artemis ammunition in my Cat C1 and that was already putting far to big a hit on my bank account.

[Umbra8]

The issue I have is weather or not the LRM in it's current form can act as an area denial weapon. What I mean is if the weapon is punishing enough for medium (slower mediums, no 80km/h variants) up to assault mechs in open terrain to oblige them to use screening or cover instead of just marching towards your position. If it can do that while maintaining a rough equivalence in tonnage with the other team then it's working. If it doesn't, it needs more tweaking, either slightly more damage or better missile convergence. This, I think, is the proper role of this weapon system, to be effective at making areas punishing to slow mechs or mechs without a collective ams screen. This form of weapon use forces creative cover use or coordination from the opposing team, but still leaves the lrm user at a disadvantage up close or without adequate spotting.

Edited by Umbra8, 14 November 2012 - 02:52 PM.

[Kaijin]

Grizley, on 14 November 2012 - 02:47 PM, said:

See you think they're not fairly costed, I think they are. That's a difference of opinion.

This primarily comes from the fact that I use LRMs as a secondary weapon, not a primary weapon. 2 tons of LRM20 ammo lasts all match for me and still does significant damage, all without the bother of aiming.

You use LRMs as a primary (and sole) weapon and want the potential to deal over 1000 damage a match with LRMs. That's a valid choice but it's going to be expensive.

You seem to like the idea that every match has 4-6 missile boats, I loathe it. Again a difference of opinion. However in this case PGI has stated that they want to make the typical range of engagement short to medium range. So I agree with PGI and you don't. I think it's far more exciting to get within 300m of a target than it is to spam LRMs at a red box.

Unless you dig up a quote somewhere that has anyone saying they want LRMs to be their sole weapon, it didn't happen. I dunno about anyone else, but as a Cat drive, I was happy with around 600 damage per match. Now, if I'm using LRMs, I'm lucky if I get 200. Lastly, if all I wanted was excitement, I'd go play Hawken. Have you considered it? MWO is a tactical sim as much as it is a twitch-based shooter.

[random51]

Not sure why people come in here and lie about LRM cost/damage when anybody can check the numbers themselves. As a weapon system they currently *are not worth what they cost* in comparison to most alternatives. The math is simple.

You're either OK with that or you're not. No need to lie about the numbers to defend your stance. Particularly no need when you're not convincing anybody.

Edited by random51, 14 November 2012 - 02:56 PM.

[multiplesanta34]

Percival Hasek, on 14 November 2012 - 01:59 PM, said:

Well, if you have artemis, all of your ammo has ot be Artemis. What are you supposed to do--take the stupidly low amounts of amo you see on trial mechs. With the pathetic damage of LRM's, you have to make up in volume of rapid fire. That requires heat sinks, and lots of ammo. if you dont take a lot of ammo, you are soon dry, left with no weapons--or a few popgun lasers on a slow 'mech. Its a losing proposition either way with LRM's. Given the huge costs you start relying on the 75%free ammo, and to boost that up so at 75% you get enough to cover most of a fight, you have to strip out items for..more ammo slots. Basically, the state of the game now is punishing players taking LRM's. Less damage, more cost, and a fairly futile weapon against fast movers.

Why not just start building balanced configs? A few ML, or a couple LL or pulse lasers seem to work fine backing up a pair of LRM15s or 20s. You run out of ammo? Then close and finish the target with your other weapons. I don't get where this idea that you have to stuff as much ammo and missiles into a mech at the exclusion of everything else comes from. You can have a mech with LRMs and still be effective without stripping your engine, armor, close-in weapons, and just boating.

[Catalinasgrace]

You guys are cracking me up.... You are telling me that all of you that are saying to you getting 400-500 and I've seen 600-1000 damage here are getting these numbers with ONLY LRMs?!?! I think not, now if you were saying I fire some off and then go in with my 4 MPLs, then I might say ok to that...

I have been in quite a few rounds in my cat that had LRMs (tried 2x LRM20s and 2x LRM15s) with a few SRMs for protection if you really want to call it that. I tore into a guy in the water just last night in a dragon that did not have AMS that was in a circle shoot with a scout. I fired over 1000 LRMs at him and I know I was hitting as I could see it and his armor lit up as well in the top right corner. This was the only guy I shot at that round just messing around to see the numbers. I ended up getting taken out by a scout that made me look like I was made of paper. However that is beside the point... My point is I was hitting him and only him that round with over 1000 LRMs right... 253 damage is all I did... I don't really care that I didn't kill him but that many missles for that amount of damage, this is not balance... He did not try to take covered once I started in on him as people have no need to fear them now. People have even said this...

Something is telling me that the ones saying they are fine are laser brawlers and don't want them in the game and it ruins their circle jerk playing style.

**EDIT** Oh and I have tried this with and without ART...

Edited by Catalinasgrace, 14 November 2012 - 03:10 PM.

[Percival Hasek]

This thread is filling up with so many straw men we may as well start a scarecrow store.

[Kaijin]

multiplesanta34, on 14 November 2012 - 03:04 PM, said:

Why not just start building balanced configs? A few ML, or a couple LL or pulse lasers seem to work fine backing up a pair of LRM15s or 20s. You run out of ammo? Then close and finish the target with your other weapons. I don't get where this idea that you have to stuff as much ammo and missiles into a mech at the exclusion of everything else comes from. You can have a mech with LRMs and still be effective without stripping your engine, armor, close-in weapons, and just boating.

A stock Catapult C1 is not 'balanced' in this way you describe. Its got 14 tons of missile launchers and only 4 tons of MLs. It's not built to be a brawler, so we tweak it to play to it's strength. We upgrade to endosteel or an XL engine and put enough ammo in there to spend the entire match doing what the mech was designed to do - Bring the rain.

[Grizley]

Kaijin, on 14 November 2012 - 02:53 PM, said:

Unless you dig up a quote somewhere that has anyone saying they want LRMs to be their sole weapon, it didn't happen. I dunno about anyone else, but as a Cat drive, I was happy with around 600 damage per match. Now, if I'm using LRMs, I'm lucky if I get 200. Lastly, if all I wanted was excitement, I'd go play Hawken. Have you considered it? MWO is a tactical sim as much as it is a twitch-based shooter.

Oh I must have imagined there were Cats with at best a couple of small/medium lasers and tons of LRMs. Wait no, stock it comes with a whopping 4 Med lasers and LRMs and usually the first thing Cat drivers do is strip one or more of the lasers for ammo/Artemis/MOARLRMS.

You know you can have an extremely effective MadCat light support with a couple of large lasers and a couple LRM 10/15 racks if you want a mixed weapon loadout. Try it, it's pretty effective.

As an aside, 600 damage a match is too high for a balance target. At the end of the game the winning team usually averages 300-400 damage. You're asking for 50% more just for using LRMs. Not gonna happen. Now I could see LRMs more on the 400 side than the 300 side due to spreading the damage around more but 600 is asking to be unbalanced.

Yes, I get that people get well over 600 sometimes. Usually drawn out matches where a couple of mechs on one side takes apart the enemy team. An LRM boat would likely run out of missiles in that situation and won't get the 1200-1300 that a laser boat can given time. That's part of the price to pay for extremely quick firing speeds and reduced heat per damage, not to mention the aimbot and extreme range.

[Hikyuu]

Noth, on 10 November 2012 - 09:42 AM, said:

No they haven't, you just can't solo the big mechs as easily now. They still pack a hurt and when used smartly (in combo with other weapons and team mates) they are very effective. As a support weapon, it isn't always all about what you do, but how what you do effects your team mates. I still see LRMs grabbing kills and putting up good damage numbers.

Missles weren't really meant to be anything but a support weapon. when carried with other weapons LRMs just gave mechs the ability to reach out and touch some one. LRM support mechs are only an extensive usage of these weapon types, but they certainly aren't 'long toms' by any means.

if you're an LRM boat you'll probably need to focus on the mechs your team is pulling in. it takes a lot of practice and communication (its why i prefer doing this with a group). it also takes spotters, narcs, tags, artemis, and good LRM streams to be dangerous as a single LRM boat. you're kinda the guy in the back going 'WHO DO YOU WANT ME TO RAIN HELL ON?!'

LRMs can't maintain on their own (and they shouldnt). this is because they're fire and forget locking missles that only require ammo and a trigger finger. HOWEVER, the game is always a balancing act and they will continue doing so, so don't be surprised if they return certain levels of damage/spread/shake to LRMs.

[RG Notch]

Catalinasgrace, on 14 November 2012 - 03:10 PM, said:

.

Something is telling me that the ones saying they are fine are laser brawlers and don't want them in the game and it ruins their circle jerk playing style.

Something is telling me that the ones saying they are useless are those who got hoked on the OP LRMs prior to the hotfix.It's stereotyping great.

[Catalinasgrace]

RG Notch, on 14 November 2012 - 03:23 PM, said:

Something is telling me that the ones saying they are useless are those who got hoked on the OP LRMs prior to the hotfix.It's stereotyping great.

Not me, I didn't buy the A1 or C4 until after they fixed that OP issue...