100 replies to this topic

[SpiralRazor]

xenoglyph, on 11 December 2012 - 11:32 PM, said:

You're sort of right. Since the beginning of MWO streaks and LRMs were easy mode.

This all changed last patch. Now real men use streaks and LRMs.

Bad players use LRMs and gimp there teams....Streaks are used by anyone able to mount an ECM, and any team that knows they will have 4+ ECMs still brings Streakcats.

.....

[Jel]

De La Fresniere, on 11 December 2012 - 11:48 PM, said:

To me it's a question of game balance.

If an action requires more skill, it should be more rewarding.

I'm fine with homing weapons existing, but they should be much weaker than the ones that require aim. In MWO, homing weapons are indeed weaker against large and slow mechs (because they can't target individual sections), but they tend to be much better than aimed weapons against small and fast mechs (because aimed weapons can miss and it's very difficult to aim at specific sections on a tiny mech moving at high speeds).

While I disagree that weapons that don't take the skill set you value should do less damage than those that take the skill set you do value, as you've stated, your direct fire weapons are already stronger than homing missiles in that you can target specific parts of mechs. As for small mechs - If we had better netcode, you could use the skill set you value to do more precise damage to small mechs too, maybe even eliminating them more quickly than weapons that don't utilize your favored skill set. But not much more quickly. Small speedy mechs are light squishy mechs that were never intended to be used to take out big heavy assault mechs single-handedly.

[SpiralRazor]

elsie, on 12 December 2012 - 01:17 PM, said:

Actually, streaks aren't the issue; netcode/lagshield is the issue. Streakboats were just a response to that problem. During CB, I did not see that many streakboats (LRM insanity, yes but they dealt with a lot of those issues). But at the same time, I (and apparently a lot of other people) didn't have much trouble bugzapping high speed lights with lasers or ballistics without having to guess for every shot where the mech really was. The biggest issue was when they were tripped and bounced teleported a half dozen times while you were shooting them. Strangely enough, they didn't seem to do that while they were moving. Just as an example from last month (that I wish I had recorded), I was chasing a hunchback in my laser HBK and shooting him in the back. I saw him turning left and zapped at him again. About that time, he teleported 5 meters to the right and was now turning right instead. Obviously I'd missed (and probably the previous shots as well) even though the client showed I had hit. If I had been in my streakboat or if netcode wasn't in a sad state of affairs, I wouldn't have missed. And yes, I was leading him with what I had guessed was the current lag effect.

As far as 'skill' goes. Let's look at what it takes to fire a 'n00blet no-skill' weapon:
1. put reticle on target
2. hold reticle on moving target until it gets a lock, hoping all the while he doesn't go out of LoS
3. Look at where he is and where he is going and decide if he will get to cover in time (for LRMs)
4. Fire weapon - if LRMs, hope that he doesn't get behind cover or that you have a spotter watching from a different angle in case you lose LoS
5. Keep reticle on target until missiles land to maintain lock
6. Continue firing until you lose lock

Now for direct fire:

1. Put reticle on target (or where you think the target actually is) and pull trigger
2. If it's ballistic, hope you guessed right; if it's laser and he's not taking damage, sweep a bit till you find him
3. Keep firing until it drops or you decide you're getting too hot

So, no, actual combat in MWO doesn't take any real skill. The real skill involves keeping your head and thinking through the strategy early in the drop, keeping your head when you turn the corner into the furball, proper target selection and maintaining situational awareness, keeping your head and knowing when to disengage or change tactics. Players that do that and still manage to hit the broad side of an atlas with whatever weapon they have are the ones that will come out with the win and/or the most damage (kills and kill assists are a non-sequitor).

Until such times as they are fixed, I will use whatever tools compensate for the deficiencies of the game, whether that be a streakcat, AC20kitty, dakkadakkaPhract, streakmando or whatever. I would hate to see what the boat-haters would say about some of the tabletop cheeze I have seen. No hardpoint restrictions there; whatever would fit in the slots and within tonnage goes.


elsie

4 CLPLS, Targeting Computer, 2 CLRM 20s w/artemis + Inferno/Swarm with a 1/2 Pilot. Yep..

[Solis Obscuri]

Pygar, on 12 December 2012 - 04:36 PM, said:

I can appreciate this. I had an epiphany a post or so ago...it's really the LOS issue that bugs me the most about them when comparing them to using direct fire weapons.(and PGI probably can't really change that very easily). The other issue is damage spreading...of which the OP even mentions how he sees "LRMs softening up targets as they advance for the direct fire guys to finish off" which is how it often played out in TT, but in MWO currently, missile boats will stomp unwitting or unlucky pilots into the dirt as fast as anything else, and in some cases faster.

Damage spread is influenced by Artemis/Narc/Tag, which can make LRMs quite deadly; without that, they tend to spread over most of the surface of the target 'mech. So if you're seeing folks die real fast, it may be as a result of these T2 missile accuracy-enhancing systems - which is, ironically, most of what ECM is really supposed to counter.

The main advantage LRMs have is that it's relatively easy for multiple 'mechs to focus indirect fire on a target vs. doing the same thing with several 'mech using direct-fire weapons. Besides that, they're worse than direct-fire weapons in nearly every way.

[Odins Fist]

Helbourne, on 12 December 2012 - 04:30 PM, said:

All the weapons take different skill sets to be effective.

.
Just like "ANY" other "First Person Shooter" I have played... G3-A3 anyone..??

[Beo Vulf]

De La Fresniere, on 11 December 2012 - 11:48 PM, said:

To me it's a question of game balance.

If an action requires more skill, it should be more rewarding.

I'm fine with homing weapons existing, but they should be much weaker than the ones that require aim. In MWO, homing weapons are indeed weaker against large and slow mechs (because they can't target individual sections), but they tend to be much better than aimed weapons against small and fast mechs (because aimed weapons can miss and it's very difficult to aim at specific sections on a tiny mech moving at high speeds).

1 missile will destroy a 100 million dollar jet fighter, it takes more than that to kill a Mech so even at their worst they really were not that bad.

[Funkin Disher]

I have no issue with weapons requiring less skill. I even believe it is somewhat required for the game to appeal to different players of different skill levels.

It is when those easy-to-use weapons become overpowered (via a higher skill level, boating, combinations with other easy weapons, whatever) when I have the problem.
Both LRMs and SSRMs were like that at one stage, but i dont think that ECM completely shutting them down is the correct response.

[Obadiah333]

Sundiver, on 11 December 2012 - 11:35 PM, said:

Not really, or at least none intended. I could've approached the topic just as easily from a Combined Arms Theory perspective. Long and the short being that missiles have a legitimate place on the Battletech battlefield.

I agree. they have a role and a place on the Battletech battlefield. To say that role is equivalent to other forms of weaponry is where the error occurs. Unless everyone here agrees that hitting a full speed Jenner with an AC 20 is easier than hitting them with streak missiles. In which case, your post is valid. Otherwise, like I suggested earlier, I smell troll bait.

[hammerreborn]

Helbourne, on 12 December 2012 - 04:30 PM, said:

Yeah and they keep calling this a 'Open Beta'. No more wipes / restarts, after a 'closed beta'.... sounds a lot like a 'game launch' to me. Okay okay... its their game, they can call whatever stage the game is in, whatever they want. I know, I have heard its different with this style of free to play.

All the weapons take different skill sets to be effective.

Oh look it's this tired argument again.

T:A, DoTA2, LoL, and Smite off the top of my head would all like to have a word with you.

Edited by hammerreborn, 12 December 2012 - 07:14 PM.

[Belkor]

Ballistics and SRMs require compensating for projectile velocity / travel time. Lasers and ballistics requires precision section aiming. Lock on weapons only require they be pointed in the general direction of the enemy. For all these weapons, you also have to adjust for sudden inconsistencies (such as a dip or a bump) in the terrain the target moves across.

Edited by Belkor, 12 December 2012 - 09:52 PM.

[Mongoose Trueborn]

Sundiver, on 11 December 2012 - 11:25 PM, said:

Been thinking about this for awhile now. The people who complain about the LRM's and Streaks being, "Easy Mode", while their Energy/Ballistic weapons are how, "real men", pilot mechs.

This game is not and never was intended to be a FPS. It's a simulation of an incredibly sophisticated machine. It's the equivalent of strapping on a modern jet fighter.

Yes, you do probably have a cannon on board but, modern air combat doctrine says you if you need it, you've screwed up. Most of your weapons are modern, fire and forget from beyond visual range.

Stop and consider nine times out of ten even you non-missile users have locked onto your target and if you're a halfway experienced player you're using your enemy damage indicated display to put your impact point where it needs to be. You watch you're impact point, get it on the section you want and hold the trigger down till it blows off. There is no practical difference between locking on from 600 meters and sniping a section than there is locking on from 600 meters and raining missiles on someone's head.

I can't count the number of times I've died to someone sniping from the edge of lock on range. The smart pilot understands and uses combined arms. Let the missile mechs rain soften targets before you move in and finish them.

If they boost LRMS to the point that would make you happy, you will still die to the same people that are killing you now. Only difference will be that you die to LRMs and this will be back to LRMs online.

When will you guys learn that the best players will use whatever is the most effective weapon and still kill you. All ECM did was make the game more fun.

[Helbourne]

hammerreborn, on 12 December 2012 - 07:14 PM, said:

Oh look it's this tired argument again.

T:A, DoTA2, LoL, and Smite off the top of my head would all like to have a word with you.

Have a word with me for what? What did I say? I am talking about labels. The devs choose to call this 'beta' so be it. They said no more wipes / restarts. Well all the other non-free to play games, stop doing wipes / restarts once they release their game. I understand they need to draw in money to continue producing a game. It is not finished, I understand that.

So people hate guided weapons, I get that too. I personally like all the weapons in the game. I just don't bother using LRMs anymore since I never know if and when I will be able to use them. Some drops hardly any ECM around, other drops, damn near everybody has ECM. I just hope this game lasts long enough for the devs to be able to put in 'community warfare' and Clan tech. I am curious to see what the game looks like at 'launch'

[Khobai]

Its ironic that players are complaining about weapons not needing aiming skill when being able to aim for specific locations is the single most broken facet of the game.

In tabletop it takes 250-300 damage to take down an Atlas because of random hit locations. In MWO you can kill a DOUBLE ARMOR Atlas with a pitiful 130 damage. So youre basically killing an Atlas with 1/4th the damage it should take to kill it simply because you can aim all the shots at its center torso.

Convergence is still the #1 weapon balance problem in the game.

Edited by Khobai, 12 December 2012 - 10:06 PM.

[Asmosis]

at long range (600m+) its much easier to hit someone with ballistics/lasers than missiles, even before ECM.

Belkor, on 12 December 2012 - 07:34 PM, said:

Ballistics and SRMs require compensating for projectile velocity / travel time. Lasers and ballistics requires precision section aiming. Lock on weapons only require they be pointed in the general direction of the enemy.

I dont recall being able to lock lrms onto opponents arms or head. If you simply fire in the general direction of an enemy, you will hit with ballistics or lasers much easier than missiles. Thats the basic requirement.

What your saying is precision aiming (e.g. gauss to atlas RT) is harder then general aiming with missiles. guess what? its harder than simply hitting an atlas with swing shots with ballistics/lasers too.

Edited by Asmosis, 12 December 2012 - 09:04 PM.

[Belkor]

Asmosis, on 12 December 2012 - 08:59 PM, said:

at long range (600m+) its much easier to hit someone with ballistics/lasers than missiles, even before ECM.

Spoken like a lame pure streaks/LRM user. Aiming at a moving target at 600m+ while compensating for projectile velocity / travel time is easier than pointing in general direction of enemy for lock? You have some screwed up logic there.

Asmosis, on 12 December 2012 - 08:59 PM, said:

I dont recall being able to lock lrms onto opponents arms or head. If you simply fire in the general direction of an enemy, you will hit with ballistics or lasers much easier than missiles. Thats the basic requirement.

What your saying is precision aiming (e.g. gauss to atlas RT) is harder then general aiming with missiles. guess what? its harder than simply hitting an atlas with swing shots with ballistics/lasers too.

If you have to rely on the most extreme examples, you're already wrong. Try gauss at any range against lights or gauss at medium to long ranges against moving meds/heavies. If you point in general direction of enemy with SRMs or ballistics without compensating for projectile velocity AND target velocity, you WILL miss. It's pretty funny how you try to completely ignore this aspect. Don't forget about the requirement of adjusting for changes in terrain too.

And yes, being able to aim specifically for parts require more skill in a chaotic battle than simply pointing in general direction of enemy for lock.

Edited by Belkor, 12 December 2012 - 09:53 PM.

[Kaziganthi]

Solis Obscuri, on 12 December 2012 - 12:49 PM, said:

This is incorrect. In CBT 'mechs could always act as spotters for indirect fire, units always shared sensor data in double-blind play (unless a pilot was rendered unconscious), and C3 only conferred benefits to direct-fire weapons by reducing range to-hit penalties:

(Total Warfare; p. 131)

Given that we don't have range to-hit penalties in this game, and there's no way to gain improved direct-fire accuracy by having a friendly unit get closer to the target, C3 is impossible.

No where in your quote does it say that units without C3 can fire whilst directing. A non C3 equipped mech cannot fire any weapons whilst spotting for indirect fire.

The advantage of TT maps is the mechs are on the board. If you play true double blind rules and have a 3rd person checking your mech placing after movement to ensure you can only see what you can see, then it would be a whole new board game.

[Kaziganthi]

Pygar, on 12 December 2012 - 01:37 PM, said:

Yeah, but the LRMs in MWO are way better than they were in tabletop, both in terms of accuracy and in terms of applied damage...and tend to solo pop targets more than just "soften them up". If LRMs behaved more like tabletop, they would spread out more and overall do less damage, and shooting targets w/out LOS would require a spotter.

You do realise your talking utter garbage here.

Everymech had their armour doubled. weapons bigger than a large laser would rip a light mechs limbs off in one hit. A hit from an LRM 20 would leave it hurting in multiple places considering the damage is alloacted in 5 point lots. TT rules mean if an LRM 20 hit, a minimum of 6 damage would be done, 5 & 1 point groupings. Most would average 12 points, 5, 5 & 2. Thats equivalent to 2 & half medium laser in 3 locations. You tell me how many commandos that 16 points max centre torso (front and rear) in TT rules that would like to get that hit if yo were lucky enough to get 3 CT rolls.

As it is in MWO, that damage is spread to every part of the mech in 1.8 allocations. IF LRM's behave like they did in TT in MWO damage allocation wise, people would be screaming even louder that LRM's still needed lerfing, even after ECM makes the just about useless.

[topgun505]

You know ... that isn't a bad idea actually.

SRMs dish out 2.5 damage per missile. SSRMs do as well.

Why?

One could argue that the sensor head in the Streaks which permit them to maneuver so much and hit 100% of the time (as they are supposed to do) would take up considerably more room on the missile and that missile would have to sacrifice SOMETHING in exchange for this.

Yes the missile launcher itself is heavier ... but the SRM round itself theoretically should have to sacrifice something as well.

It only makes sense that it would either have to reduce the amount of propellant it uses (i.e. has a shorter range) ... or more likely ... it has a different seeker head/warhead assembly. I.e. it has a smaller warhead in order to make up for the heavier seeker head.

Thus the missile should do less damage. The question is .. what would be reasonable? Instead of 2.5 ... maybe 2.0? 1.75? 1.5? 1.0?

Aside from the above logic, the armor values in MWO were doubled and most weapons left their damage values the same as the tabletop. An SRM or SSRM normally do 2.0 damage per missile in tabletop. So the SSRMs (and SRMs) in MWO already do more damage than they theoretically should in the first place.

Maybe drop SRMs back to what they should be ... 2.0 and drop SSRMs to 1.75 or 1.5?

Sounds reasonable to me.

One Medic Army, on 12 December 2012 - 12:33 AM, said:

Well it comes down to risk/reward or more specifically difficulty/effectiveness.
Streaks are fairly easy to use
Lasers are a bit harder
Dumbfire SRMs are somewhat harder
Ballistics are even harder

LRMs currently I'd say are hard, but only if PUGing, with a team and a dedicated supporter or two it's not too hard.

Ideally the effectiveness of any system should scale with how difficult it is to use said system, as well as with the sacrafices required to use said system.
Streaks are pretty much the easiest weapons system to use, and they require next to no sacrifices. Therefore they should be among the least powerful weapons. (Not counting ECM, which at this point most people realize it needs tweaking).

TL:DR if a weapon is both easier to use, easier to mount, and as or nearly as effective, then what's the point of having the harder to use systems at all?

Edited by topgun505, 12 December 2012 - 10:01 PM.

[Kaijin]

Obadiah333, on 12 December 2012 - 06:20 PM, said:

I agree. they have a role and a place on the Battletech battlefield. To say that role is equivalent to other forms of weaponry is where the error occurs.

Nobody is going to use a gimped weapon system.

[Kaijin]

Belkor, on 12 December 2012 - 09:37 PM, said:

being able to aim specifically for parts require more skill in a chaotic battle than simply pointing in general direction of enemy for lock.

That's not skill - It's situational awareness coupled with the ability to move a mouse around on a mouse pad and click the buttons. If anything takes skill in this game it's piloting. Gunnery is comparatively easy.