58 replies to this topic

[Sychodemus]

Macross Missile Massacres are fun, but they require boomph-mobiles to work properly.

[Black Mamba]

I just want more noticeable smoke trails and also a more oomph sounding missile launch.

[Ulric Kell]

I'm fine with the massive launch. Feel more like the power they are supposed to have. I always hated the single line of fire. Seems so slow and easily avoidable.

[Naduk]

and that Ulric is exactly why i am hoping they have a toggle so we can swap modes at will
i hate the clump fire, to me it feels stupid, i wouldn't care if others were doing it but its not my cuppa tea

also black mumba is spot on, way more smoke needed and much more oomphf and whoosh when launching

[MaddMaxx]

I think someone forgot #4

ROLL THOSE 5 x D5 DICE!

Moving on. A plausible reason the Damage readout was simply the flickering (other than being a Alpha view) is that to get the actual damage on an enemy Mech requires your own LOS, unless of course they incorporate that facility via transfer of LOS data via installed Scout Modules.

It would be cool to have the spotter have LOS long enough to transmit actual damage #'s back to the shooter. Otherwise, the choice is keep Launching or get in close enough ot get LOS data for yourself. LOL

Edited by MaddMaxx, 08 May 2012 - 08:51 AM.

[AC]

Abrahms, on 07 May 2012 - 06:59 PM, said:

What I dont get... is how they dont all collide and just detonate in the air! massive swirlfest in the sky was a little odd... and yeah, needs smoke added (I know, pre-beta build...)

That was my problem too. This is the future and the missiles seem like something the chinese invented centuries ago. The swirl around so fast, it makes them look like they have no mass. Might as well of launched confetti at the enemy. The crazy swarm swirl flight pattern needs to be toned down a bit.

Generally speaking, they wouldn't launch all at ones either. An all at once launch increases the chances of them colliding in mid air with eachother. They would be launched very very quickly and close to eachother, but the all at once with the swarm swirl flight makes them look kinda silly.

[Kale Cytair]

Funny Pictures

[Red3y3One]

My thought is it all depends Before 3025 you would have to have missiles fire at the target and have a chance of all your missiles impacting all over the mech doing splash damage to areas.( I havn,t seen anything on the SRMs ). Or are we talking 3050 timeline where they have recovered tech and can now use the swarm,Tag, C3 ect to up your chances of hitting the Target. Not matter what iif you fire a LRM 20 at someone that person should be worried it should make you say of Crap.

Also have they mentioned anything about Inferno rounds? for SRMs?

[Mchawkeye]

Can I say that I really, really liked the portrayal of the missiles? loved the launch, the way they swarmed together and then thudded down on top of the target...the semi-organic way they moved looked really cool to me. remind me kind of like the ancient drones in Stargate...

Very cool PGI. very cool.

[mekredd]

Eh.

Missile swarm makes much more sense, since point defense is a thing in Battletech.

And asthetically the cloud of missiles is much more intimidating than a trickle. Guess that's just your taste, but I don't get it. Missile streams bothered the heck out of me in Mech 2, I'm glad for the change.

[Lightfoot]

Typically missiles are pretty accurate. If you take all the time to establish a lock and aim you earned at least accuracy and good damage. Compare to an AC you just fire instantly. Anyway, if you take the time to aim and lock them they better not just spatter around the target.

[Ralkir]

Why fire a missile when you can launch a whole circus?

[EmyLightsaber]

[UncleKulikov]

Hopefully in the future different manufacturers have different firing patterns. All at once is good if they all hit, but firing in sustained volley could increase accuracy with a continued bombardment in clusters of missiles.

It doesn't bother me enough to complain, but I would like alternatives to be made available.

And the LRM 20 fires 2 waves of 10 from the first gameplay video.

Edited by UncleKulikov, 08 May 2012 - 12:55 PM.

[MaddMaxx]

UncleKulikov, on 08 May 2012 - 12:54 PM, said:

And the LRM 20 fires 2 waves of 10 from the first gameplay video.

Good point. Also, if they stick with TT, each 10 cluster would have 2 groups with a potential damage of 1-5 each. So in affect, you do get a quasi continuous bombardment element. Given 2 LRM10 launchers with staggered fire... ouchers.

P.S. The video showed a second launch being fired before the first volley actually arrived at the target.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 08 May 2012 - 01:58 PM.

[Siilk]

neodym, on 07 May 2012 - 09:24 PM, said:

1. I dont like the spread,MW2,MW3,MW4 send them in this tight and direct way

2. the launch,all at once I dont like it.... it looked cool in the trailer,its cinematic and dramatic,I would like it on SRM but LRM,I much more liked the old launch style,this epic stream of concentrated death

^This. Additionally, I think that trails could be thicker while missiles themselves should be slightly less manoeuvrable.

I must confess that my favourite LRM implementation is MWLL one. Cool sound, perfect launch pattern, thick trails -- what not to like?

[Naduk]

wow those missiles from MW:LL are awesome
that style in MWO would be the penultimate

[LackofCertainty]

I know that smoke trails are a downside for long range weapons (makes it easier for enemies to track you) but I really want some substantial smoke trails on my missiles. As it is the missiles just look like schizophrenic AC rounds to me. (just bright dots of light basically that zig all over)

Then again, these are pre-beta graphics so there's still time for changes. *fingers crossed*

Geist Null, on 07 May 2012 - 05:48 PM, said:

i dont have a problem with the missles going as they do what-so-ever. but the way you recieve the information of how well you did is quite sparse. watching the display on the cat all you can see is the missles go over the hill and then a few odd flash patterns on the enemy mech profile. theres no massive explosions over there and nothing to tell you if you hit the jenner or if someone else was hitting that jenner. i understand that the cats sensors were prolly basic mode only and that it was far away, but going on visul cue only i instantly got the impression that his missles either 75% missed or were incredibally ineffective. (its a jenner and i cant help but do TT math in my mind)
maybe if a caption popped up that said "12/20 missles recorded a hit" that would be a nice approach to letting players know missles do their job.

I agree on the need for more feedback. Maybe something along the lines of what MWLL does, where there's a little "thud" sound effect for every missile that hits. If you hear *thud* *thud* then you know that most of your missiles missed. If you hear *Th-th-thud-ud-thud-thud-thud-ud-th-thud!* it puts a big grin on your face, cause you know you just hit with nearly everything.

Corbon Zackery, on 07 May 2012 - 07:59 PM, said:

Right now missle are pretty powerful in the game because...

Holy crap! I didn't know Corbon Zackery was in the Friends and Family beta! Holy crap, is he breaking NDA?! He must be in the F&F beta, because otherwise how would he be able to know the power level of a weapon in a game he's never played before?
/sarcasm

Sorry for being a bit of a dick about it, but it always annoys me when people talk about balance of something they've never touched. We don't know if LRM's will be good or if they'll be crappy. We don't know if you can outrun/juke them as they're coming down. We don't really know anything other than they are in the game, feature lock, can be fired without line of sight, and have close to cannon TT range.

Maybe they'll end up being the equivalent of throwing wet toilet paper balls at enemy mechs. Maybe they'll be metallic rain of death. Either way, we won't know till beta.

[MaddMaxx]

Wasn't it mentioned and then confirmed by a Dev, that the FX and audio was heavily reduced so everyone could actually hear the Dev talk during the video?

What part of that "factual info" are we missing again? Anyone...

Edited by MaddMaxx, 09 May 2012 - 05:17 AM.