237 replies to this topic

[Havyek]

M4rtyr, on 14 January 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

No they don't work in Live action mainly due to the fire rate. however, you are honestly going to tell me that SRM's need the higher damage for no other reason then spread, which is part of their balance, or short range, part of their balance again, or the doubleing of armor? Thats all BS.

Yes.
Missile boats of any type suffer from MAJOR drawbacks. Unlike any other form of weapons, they do 0 damage outside of their effective range. 0, as in NONE. ZERO.
Stand at 280m to a SRM or SSRM boat, and know how much damage you'll take? 0.
Stand inside 180m to a LRM boat and guess how much damage you'll take? Again, 0.

Currently SRM boats are the bane of people who can't pay attention or use the information they have on hand when they target an enemy.
LRM boats are the bane of people who can't/don't use cover effectively. Don't give me the BS about (they can hit everyone without LOS!). Yes, they can hit someone without the target having LOS to the LRM boat, that still doesn't mean that you're restricted to using cover to not get shot.
LRMs don't fall from 90 degrees any more, hiding from LRM fire is a cake-walk now compared to a few months ago before the trajectory was adjusted.

M4rtyr, on 14 January 2013 - 07:21 AM, said:

I will grant you that ML and MPL have had their heat dropped one point I missed that, but they still are at much more of a disadvantage then missiles. putting the missile damage will not hurt them. I don't care if I wasn't here to see it, I know how much damage they would do and how it's applied. All it'll do is put them more in line and you'll get less complaints about missile boats. Again, not seeing any complaint about laser boats.

MLAS and MPLAS had their heat INCREASED because they are so much more effective than SRMs and LRMs.
The fact that you're still trying to argue the fact that you know what should be done in theory when the rest of us know how much that theory failed in practice shows your true ignorance WRT weapon balance.

[MaddMaxx]

M4rtyr, on 14 January 2013 - 06:59 AM, said:

You have no idea.. 2 mechs, or more, can fire on an enemy when only one mech is exposed. And when done right that spotting mech is the hardest to hit light mech.

I'm not saying you didn't need any LOS, but it is still the only weapon you can use and not get shot back at. Get real.

Send a resume into PGI, quick, they need your expertise. But before that, please take a writing course. You are currently lacking in that field.

Quote

"allows you to hit targets -THAT AREN'T EVEN IN LOS-."

[Noth]

M4rtyr, on 14 January 2013 - 07:33 AM, said:

I've not payed for DHS on my 4SP yet, geting the 3rd hunchie first for elites. But I stager fire my 4 MLs, one arm then the other and overheat witht he stock number of sinks. In TT I wouldn't overheat like I do with just those 4, but I have a higher fire rate but the heat disipation rate isn't at the same level as the fire rate for lasters. Its why the heats been dropped on some energy weapons and why laser/ppc boats don't work, or at least not as well as missile or ballistic boats and missile boats are better then ballistics.

But AGIAN.... if the damages for missiles were so bad after the armor double why weren't other damage's terrible?

I'm not saying all testing was wrong, I'm just not agreeing with what people expect from their weapons. SRM's are meant to have the spread, thats how they were not OP'ed in TT. Even Streaks in TT had a spread for hit locations, all missiles would hit but they still spread. and LRM's aren't ever meant to do mass damage, so doing crap damage as you say is balanced to me. Because lrms can shoot you when you can't shoot them back. Or does the value of a light, or even an Atlas getting the extra damage to their target not mean anything.

I don't doubt that the low damage or spread annoyed people. but do they really understand Battletech or are they just working based on what they thing it should do based on other criteria?



Heh it has been a while... was thinking 5 damge 5 heat. so it was raised no wounder the heat is a problem.

So double armor needed more damage from missiles but less sustained damage from lasers.. makes sense.

Sigh

Other weapons damage wasn't terrible because they were much easier to place damage with. There was no random factor to where they hit (outside of bugs). Where that AC 10 could fire at the center torso of a non moving target at 100 meters, it hits the center torso and does full damage. The SRM however could fire at the center torso from the same range and have the damage scatter around the entire mech. This leads to the AC10 having more precise damage, thus able to kill faster (outside of near point blank from an SRM). This factor also leads to effective killers killing with less damage done overall.

In movement being that precise is difficult, but still possible. It is not always about raw damage. It is about being able to place that damage and SRMs can only do that at near point blank ranges. Thus you can have damage and effective damage.

Also, this is not TT. It is mechwarrior. By the simple fact that the game is real time and a FPS, balance will be different and weapons may take on roles that they didn't have in TT. You read the Lore you have many things that absolutely break what is defined as happening in TT and that include LRMs and SRMs just flat wrecking people not taking precautions.

[Flapdrol]

I wouldn't mind an srm damage reduction, would nerf streaks a bit as well.

the "bad players trying to get things nerfed" argument to keep them the same is nonsense. To balance weapons you just have to try stuff like this. If it's implemented and they become ineffective and underused just buff them agian.

[Noth]

Flapdrol, on 14 January 2013 - 07:43 AM, said:

I wouldn't mind an srm damage reduction, would nerf streaks a bit as well.

the "bad players trying to get things nerfed" argument to keep them the same is nonsense. To balance weapons you just have to try stuff like this. If it's implemented and they become ineffective and underused just buff them agian.

It was already done and tested as such... it was useless.

[Pando]

Broceratops, on 13 January 2013 - 08:58 AM, said:

good players adapt, bad players qq until things get nerfed then qq about whatever the good players switch over to. turn yourself into a good player to break the cycle.

THIS

OR,

NERFZ ALL TEH WEAPONZ

[M4rtyr]

BDU Havoc, on 14 January 2013 - 07:34 AM, said:

Yes.
Missile boats of any type suffer from MAJOR drawbacks. Unlike any other form of weapons, they do 0 damage outside of their effective range. 0, as in NONE. ZERO.
Stand at 280m to a SRM or SSRM boat, and know how much damage you'll take? 0.
Stand inside 180m to a LRM boat and guess how much damage you'll take? Again, 0.

Currently SRM boats are the bane of people who can't pay attention or use the information they have on hand when they target an enemy.
LRM boats are the bane of people who can't/don't use cover effectively. Don't give me the BS about (they can hit everyone without LOS!). Yes, they can hit someone without the target having LOS to the LRM boat, that still doesn't mean that you're restricted to using cover to not get shot.
LRMs don't fall from 90 degrees any more, hiding from LRM fire is a cake-walk now compared to a few months ago before the trajectory was adjusted.

MLAS and MPLAS had their heat INCREASED because they are so much more effective than SRMs and LRMs.
The fact that you're still trying to argue the fact that you know what should be done in theory when the rest of us know how much that theory failed in practice shows your true ignorance WRT weapon balance.

The ranges are part of the balance from the TT too. They didn't change the damage based on those SAME drawbacks. But what you are telling me is they changed in MWO because people didn't think LRM's did enough damage. They aren't supposed to do alot and make kills they are supposed to soften targets. So leads me to beleive the choice was made based on the wrong criteria.

You say SRM's had their damage increased because they didn't do enough thanks to the spread. Thats their balance, again I'm thinking wrong criteria. Again, if you have an SRMCat with base damages thats still 72 possible damage. and I'm sorry but people claiming **** about avoiding SRM boats is ******* stupif.. NO ONE, I don't care how good you are can avoid them AT ALL TIMES. but thats ok, I'll give it too you because the SRM damage effects streaks too, streak don't care about spread. Don't don't tell me that lights don't feel that extra point of damager per SSRM2 they take (+.5 per missile x2 missiles just so no one sais it's its only half a point).

And if lasers are so effective then again, why is all the talk related to missiles since I got here.

ECM'ers say ECM is fine because missile boats are OP'ed.
Missile boaters complaining because it ECM breaks the only good builds in the game. Instead of using an energy weapon build which is supposed to be as good.

But hey. What do I know. I now get into peoples face with a 64KPH Hunchie and rip arms or torsos off in a couple volleys with just 2 SRM6's. Would I complain if they put it back to its base 2 points per missile hell no. It's the only hunchback I would use really and I STILL want the SRM damage dropped. I know you claim it will make them worthless. But I know for fact they will still be more then effective enough because I understand the game. Just think people are using the wrong criteria for whats right and what isn't.

Edited by M4rtyr, 14 January 2013 - 07:53 AM.

[Flapdrol]

Noth, on 14 January 2013 - 07:45 AM, said:

It was already done and tested as such... it was useless.

but that was before artemis.

[Sheraf]

Streaks no longer home in to your CT only. They spread over your arm and leg joints. I think it is fine as it is. Streaks and SRM only have effective range of 270m. Using a pair of large laser to shoot at them over that range is very effective way to deal with them . If they not die yet, their armor is badly cripple anyway. Even if they come close, just shoot their weapon pods off.

[Noth]

Flapdrol, on 14 January 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

but that was before artemis.

Artemis puts them back to their prenerf levels of spread, which also was not that bad at all. Maybe an additional 50 meters of effective range.

[M4rtyr]

Let me ask you guys this...

If you have any experience with the TT.

Can you say the SRMs were underpowered in TT?

In no, then how can they be less effective in MWO when you can have less to no spread at <100m range. I mean when you can get that kind of damage applied to 1 or even 2 locations I really honestly can't understand how you feel they ever once sucked.

[Havyek]

M4rtyr, on 14 January 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

But I know for fact they will still be more then effective enough because I understand the game. Just think people are using the wrong criteria for whats right and what isn't.

I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because you're just repeating what you've been repeating and focus on this quote.

You don't know jack. You haven't tested the original TT values in a live action simulator, you don't have access to the back-end of the MWO database or coding.

You also refuse to pay any attention to people who actually did play and remember how useless LRMs were at 1.5 damage.

Flapdrol, on 14 January 2013 - 07:51 AM, said:

but that was before artemis.

Artemis is negated by ECM and only effects targets in LOS. So Arty does nothing but take up space when you're within an ECM sphere, or firing LRMs at a target in the open, on the other side of a hill.

[Noth]

M4rtyr, on 14 January 2013 - 08:00 AM, said:

Let me ask you guys this...

If you have any experience with the TT.

Can you say the SRMs were underpowered in TT?

In no, then how can they be less effective in MWO when you can have less to no spread at <100m range. I mean when you can get that kind of damage applied to 1 or even 2 locations I really honestly can't understand how you feel they ever once sucked.

They can be less effective by the simple fact that this is a real time game and thus you can counter actions much faster. You don't have to wait turns and with comparisons to the other weapons don't gain near as much as they do from being able to actively aim. I can pick apart a SRM catapult before it can get close, neutering most of it's damage. I fear an AC20 cat far more than an SRM cat since they can kill me from a longer range and typically faster than an SRM cat.You are highly under estimating being able to reliably place damage at farther than near point blank range.

[OxHR]

Why nerf SRM? Because they can deal good amount of dmg in point blank? And what about other ranges, by my experience anything above 90 m might get 80-10% of SRM load depending how far they are and if you manage to hit at all. When do they get hit they are hit on whole body not on any specified part unlike Lasers and Ballistics. Killing someone with SRM requires from you to leave shelter, probably passing open ground while you try to catch your target and when you do manage to do all that the target have equal or even bigger chance to get you down. How? SRM does splash dmg and killing someone is not so easy it takes time, opponent my be smart enough to concentrate on your torso and move away it weak side exposing armoured part when you fire delay ends. SRM for me is more of anti-Assult weapon and tool to weaken armour a bit before destroying selected body part with lasers.

Edited by OxHR, 14 January 2013 - 08:05 AM.

[Crockdaddy]

Fat Samurai, on 13 January 2013 - 06:27 AM, said:

Whoever is letting a 6 SRM6 Stalker get closer than 100m of his mech deserves anything that he gets.

Exactly what I was thinking. I popped a Commando 2D whom clearly thought he was invisible, as he walked in front of my 4 SRM6 2 SRM4 Cat. The insta kill was gratifying after the little **stard had been strafing me for the first minute or two. Like most reasonable folks, once I see either a gausspult or an SRM cat, we call it out and focus fire. I wish focus fire would work just as well on Raven 3L's.

[M4rtyr]

BDU Havoc, on 14 January 2013 - 08:02 AM, said:

I'm going to ignore the rest of your post because you're just repeating what you've been repeating and focus on this quote.

You don't know jack. You haven't tested the original TT values in a live action simulator, you don't have access to the back-end of the MWO database or coding.

You also refuse to pay any attention to people who actually did play and remember how useless LRMs were at 1.5 damage.

There are two variables in this discussion. the damage and the spread (how many missiles hit and where). The spread I know from whats in now and I'm not asking for a change there. So there fore the only change would be the damage. Based on the current spread and ability to hit then its not a real hard challenge to change 2.5 with 2 for those missile.

So yes I DO know how its going will work and thats not broken to me. I don't have to have actually played with the 2 damage setting to tell me. Its only obvious it'll be .5 damage less per hit. Just because you were in closed beta doesn't mean you have any special knowledge, got knew for you. Not if the changes were more substantial then yes experience would play a factor but nore when its just how many missiles, where, and damage per missile.

[Sheraf]

SRM can only do damage a lot at point blank. Basically you have to hug your target to able to do that type of damage. What if people on the other team also shoot at you? You will die pretty quick. You might be able to take out one, but die afterward anyway. Only time when that work is you able to get behind their formation. The SRM user can't be blamed for this, it is the fault of the team to let something like this slip behind you.

[Noth]

M4rtyr, on 14 January 2013 - 08:07 AM, said:

There are two variables in this discussion. the damage and the spread (how many missiles hit and where). The spread I know from whats in now and I'm not asking for a change there. So there fore the only change would be the damage. Based on the current spread and ability to hit then its not a real hard challenge to change 2.5 with 2 for those missile.

So yes I DO know how its going will work and thats not broken to me. I don't have to have actually played with the 2 damage setting to tell me. Its only obvious it'll be .5 damage less per hit. Just because you were in closed beta doesn't mean you have any special knowledge, got knew for you. Not if the changes were more substantial then yes experience would play a factor but nore when its just how many missiles, where, and damage per missile.

Actually, You do know that most of the time what looks good on paper doesn't work out. You don't know what it would be like. If .3 damage difference on LRMs can be the difference between them being effective or useless, you better bet that a .5 damage decrease on a weapon with a much smaller area of use is going to make them pretty much worthless. that supposed small change can create a big effect. You do not know what it was like, you don't know at all and you flat out tell people that do know that they are wrong. A tester that has tested what you are saying will work and has experienced it not working, soes in fact have special knowledge compared to you.

[M4rtyr]

Noth, on 14 January 2013 - 08:04 AM, said:

I can pick apart a SRM catapult before it can get close, neutering most of it's damage.

No, you can't... most of the maps are far to close for you to avoid them. Like I said, I have no problem getting close to ANYONE in a SLOW mech. Only Caustic valley can you keep at range AT ALL TIMES.

But you know I don't ******* care... I'll say fine, asll you can keep out of the real dangerous range, I still say even at >200m they would be balanced at the lower damage because that is their draw back. Its exactly why Streak are an upgrade vs a standard SRM. Its common sense.

[Noth]

M4rtyr, on 14 January 2013 - 08:12 AM, said:

No, you can't... most of the maps are far to close for you to avoid them. Like I said, I have no problem getting close to ANYONE in a SLOW mech. Only Caustic valley can you keep at range AT ALL TIMES.

But you know I don't ******* care... I'll say fine, asll you can keep out of the real dangerous range, I still say even at >200m they would be balanced at the lower damage because that is their draw back. Its exactly why Streak are an upgrade vs a standard SRM. Its common sense.

All the maps have nice open areas to avoid SRM boaters. All of them. They only time they get to me is if they ambush me, flank me (as in me being occupied by another target) or I get cocky and rush in.

Also, they aren't wanting things like streaks to be flat upgrades. They want them to be more of a sidegrade. So I suggest changing your thinking on that.