63 replies to this topic

[focuspark]

TLDR: Fix LRM, SSRM, and ECM by:
* Removing the guided missile lock-on mechanism. It's unfair and pretty much un-fun.
* Limit all of ECM's effects to the 180m radius and do not allow it to affect targets outside of that radius.

Given the rather large number of threads complaining about ECM, LRM, and SSRM I think the developers have to believe these systems are broken, or at least need to be tweaked in someway to keep the masses happy. While I don't have the statistics available to me that the developers do, I believe these systems are broken and over used compared with other comparable systems; and I have a few suggestions which I think will things.

First, let's discuss risk vs. reward. It's the basis of gaming and when out of balance the arbitrary measurement of fun is reduced. This is especially true in competitive games and even more so in MMO games. Since MW:O is both, the outcry about LRM, SSRM, and ECM is understandable. If something offers no risk or no reward it should be fixed or removed from any game as it reduces the amount of fun overall (either by the user or those affected).

First let's address, what I believe is, the root problem: guided missile lock-on. It needs to go away. Because they can lock-on to a target and seek that target out regardless of pretty much anything, LRM have frustrated players for a long time. The same is true for SSRM. Instead both systems should be player skill based.

LRM should fire with a heavy arc to them every time they fire such that it's visibly obvious that they could never strike a target closer than 180m. LRM should attack a location based on either the target in the cross hairs. If the target moves, the missiles miss. This limits their utility against distant or fast targets. LRM special ability should be, that unlike other weapon systems, they will range find targets behind blocking terrain using an ally's LOS.

LRM arc needs to be consistent and the missiles should not retarget, just simply fly to the location the target was when they were fired. If the target is relatively stationary, it'll be hit otherwise the shot is wasted. Of course, terrain in the path of the arc should block the missiles.

This change drastically reduces LRM utility as a blind fire weapon without removing it. It however balances LRM risk vs reward and restores balanced fun to the game. Skilled pilots with a good team will still rain hell with LRM fire.

Regardless of direct or indirect, LRM firing arc needs to be fixed (as in repaired). LRM need to soar far up in the air then cruise to their target such that it's visibly impossible to hit a target closer than 180m. I see to many players charge their targets with a pair of LRM20 firing pointlessly at 50m without realizing that they're doing zero damage. The feedback mechanism is missing.

SSRM are a problem that is only going to get worse. Today only SSRM2 are available, but soon Clan 'mechs will have SSRM6 which will be the penultimate weapon system given the current mechanics. Fixing SSRM is easy are removing lock-on and making them fire just like SRM do today. SSRM should have one difference, if at least a single missile connects: all missiles connect. This makes them far more accurate than SRM without being completely over powered.

The immediate response to my suggest SSRM fix is usually: well how do you fix the animation to represent it? The answer is simple: you don't. It is completely unnecessary.

The final fix is for ECM. Assuming the above suggestions are accepted, the lock-on mechanic has been removed from the game and ECM's ability to block lock-on is meaningless. I do believe that ECM was introduce the way it was to counter the badly designed guided missile lock-on system, which needed to be removed and not countered. However, ECM still has an unbalanced risk vs reward feature and that's the ability to jam all sensors on the map regardless. This means ECM requires no risk to the player using it in order for that player to get a significant reward. All of ECM's effects need to be limited to the 180m radius.

Constructive comments and suggestions welcome.

[focuspark]

Push back to page 1. I really would like some solid feedback on this.

[Zyzyx66]

I think removing the lock-on from LRMs will make the weapon utterly useless . The time it takes for LRMs to reach a target outside 200 metres is long enough that any mech that isn't stationary won't be there when the missiles hit. The only way I see that working would be if LRMs had a massive area of effect when they hit, although the damage they dealt would still be pretty negligible.

A compromise (and one I think could work well) would be to give the LRMs a finite tracking speed - a fast 'mech moving quickly enough could outrun the LRMs at sufficient distance.

SSRMs should lock on and track. If they don't, they're nothing more than SRMs that are slower to fire due to requirement to lock - or exactly SRMs if you remove the lock on requirement.

Again, a compromise could be that SSRMs DO lock on, and from the point of firing automatically fire toward their target, but they have no tracking once in the air. This would mean you could get a target lock and fire without the target in the reticule and the SSRMs would fire towards it, but they wouldn't track - they'd be great for targets not moving perpendicular at fast speeds.

As for ECM - I don't think reducing the range is an effective way of countering it's benefits. It would either have no effect on its usefulness, or make it totally redundant.

Perhaps the following changes to a few of ECMs effects might work instead:

* INCREASE the range of ECM a little, so friendlies aren't rolling in a big tight ball - probably the main reason ECMs do so well in public matches is because they actually get the team moving together (meaning it's a by product of ECM and not the actual effects of ECM that make the difference).

* With target locks - ECM could still allow target locks just as normal, but it limits two things. Firstly, LRMs don't track against ECM-shielded targets (just like you suggest), although they will fire at the locked target's initial position. Secondly, ECM eliminates a 'mechs ability to get any further targetting info - they get the first stage lock, but nothing more (no paper doll, etc).

* 'Mech target triangles are hidden under an ECM shield, unless you have your reticule over them. So a player would need to sweep an area to find targets. This means that if you can physically SEE them, it's like you're overriding your targetting suite and telling your 'mech "there is a target here" and it follows along. It would still make ECM potent (probably still too potent) but it allows a player to still get that lock.

I know my response is actually completely counter to what you've suggested, but I think ultimately giving players more ability to avoid effects raises the skill ceiling and offers more options. Your suggestions I feel would just totally gimp LRMs, SSRMs and ECM (well, maybe not ECM but it wouldn't fix it either).

Edited by Zyzyx66, 19 January 2013 - 03:09 PM.

[focuspark]

My problem with ECM is that it affects the entire map as it is today. A mech 2KM away is affected by it because it somehow blocks radar regardless of where the radar is loccated. That's stealth technology, not ECM technology. ECM offers a power reward while requiring no risk on the part of the benefiting player. Instead the ECM 'mech should need to be within 180m of the victims to increase the risk to a level that is balanced with the reward offered.

I agree removing lock-on from SSRM would make them basically just SRM... but that's what they are. They're just SRM with a small bonus. Today the bonus is too large. Why would anyone ever fit SRM2 vs SSRM2? They wouldn't unless they were really uneducated to the differences.

LRM do move too slow. I agree. They should up the travel speed from 200m/s to 500m/s or similar.

LRM should be mostly useless as great ranges against moving targets. There's no reason they should so effective while offer no risk to the attacking 'mech. That's the actual complaint of most people regarding LRM today.

Edited by focuspark, 19 January 2013 - 03:15 PM.

[focuspark]

More feedback?

[Corvus Antaka]

mech3 LRMS.

SSRMS I'd go for mech3 style too, or the current, but they need to turn less effectively and do less damage. for an ssrm2 they do way to much damage.

Jumpjets ala btech:3025 would be perfect.

Missiles are designed to track way to well. with ssrms its understandable, with LRMS it is not. However, the current way LRMS work as streak LRMS means fast mechs, good pilots and jumpjets are all useless in evasion - only cover and AMS or ECM are really good counters.

This makes jumpjets nearly worthless as evasive items, which they are supposed to be.

This also makes ECM the go to choice to expand tactical options when confronted by LRM boats, exactly because LRMS are otherwise so OP in both damage and tracking while requiring little pilot skill except for the hold "TAG - your it" mechanic.

redesigning these 2 weapons systems and the radar function and obviously ECM should be the core focus for PGI as they look to addressing & resolving both weapons balance & the flow and fun of battles.

[focuspark]

I'd be very happy with SSRM and LRM following the targeting reticle, so long as the lock on mechanic was removed.

Was watching a few matches on YouTube the other night and realized that hardest part for PGI is figuring out which target to range for. Therefore LRM might still require a semi-lock on mechanic which sets the range to the target, but doesn't allow the missiles to track the target.

Also, looked at CBT and LRM are rather damn inaccurate at long range and they have a random number of missiles connecting with the target regardless of pilot skill. This is better modeled by LRM being more shotgun style, but a shot gun that rains missiles on you and throws slugs at you.

[Jale]

Focus park i agree with you 100% on SSRMs and how they should role without lock on leading to more complicated usage but not for LRMs .
LRMs are semi-guided missiles thats why they are long ranged, therefore they cannot turn 180 degree angle or anything like that. We should keep lock on on LRMs and Artemis

[focuspark]

But if you look at how TT balanced LRMs, they're fairly inaccurate at long range or at least no more accurate than any other weapon. MW:O implementation is to make them guided, fire and forget weapons. This is a huge problem because it's very difficult to balance them.

Better to have LRMs range find their target in place of today's lock on. If the pilot fires before the range find is complete, the missile just dump fire like a giant ball of long range SRMs. If the pilot allows the range find to complete, the missiles fire in a massive arc to the target's location. The target should not get a warning bell, but if it does move the missile miss.

As for SSRM, I've been discussing this a lot on the forums lately and I think I have a better solution. Basically, have the client do a quick match check to see if the missiles would connect with the target. If they would allow the SSRM2 to be fired, but if the computer thinks they wouldn't give an audible "buzz" sound and prevent the missiles from being fired. This is much closer to how CBT describes it and removes the super agile missiles from hell scenario I constantly see with SSRM2 today.

[Volthorne]

And how, exactly, would you implement the indirect-fire ability of LRMs? Assuming you actually knew they had that in TT.

[Theobald Hauser]

Funny, I said the same thing to him in one of the 176 other threads were he's exactly saying the same thing too.
He didn't answer.

[Fut]

I'm all for tweaking things, but they really should make sense...

focuspark, on 19 January 2013 - 03:14 PM, said:

LRM should be mostly useless as great ranges against moving targets. There's no reason they should so effective while offer no risk to the attacking 'mech. That's the actual complaint of most people regarding LRM today.

So LONG RANGE Missiles should be mostly useless at great ranges against moving targets?
Yeah, that sounds like a reasonable suggestion.

A couple suggestions to play with regarding LRMS:

• Remove their Guided-Fire mode, but make them easier/more appealing to dumbfire. Increasing their speed quite a bit, and allowing an adjustment on trajectory (manually "dial in" the arc of fire before firing) would make them effective at dumbfiring targets at range.
  
• Enable a Guided-Fire Mode, but only when a scout with TAG or NARC (or self-TAG) is designating a target.

No idea if this would actually work or not, but it seems like a better idea than just removing their Guided-Fire Mode completely.

[Theobald Hauser]

There's nearly the case as it is now, due to ECM. We LRMs users have learned to cope, it's even fun, because ECM is so strong that ECMed pilots tend to become far too confident, losing all their "keep under cover" skills. TAGs are really useful now. NARCs have no use at all on the other hand (i don't want them to go through ECM though, it would far more interesting gameplay-wise to make them permament but scrambled near ECMs).

I find it funny when people says that there is no risk at LRMboating.
You need an XL engine making you really vulnerable, you're really short on close combat hardpoints, you have to stockpile a ****load of heavy ammos, that makes you totally implose from wherever a critical hit is taken, you need to TAG and lose an additional slot, you're often really slow and cumbersome, you can be completely screwed because of a 2 slot 1.5 ton little thingy...
Yeah. No-risk build indeed.

Edited by Amarius, 23 January 2013 - 12:03 PM.

[focuspark]

LRM indirect fire doesn't exist in TT until C3 comes into play, but in MW:O it seems all 'mechs have C3i built in for free; so let's role with that.

LRM fire requires Targeting Data, or TD, to be available. TD can be obtained via LOS or a team mate with LOS. If you're using a team mates LOS for TD, then it is indirect fire. Note that if either mech is within the 180m radius of ECM TD cannot be shared.

Basically, I'm proposing that when using LRM for indirect fire LRM works just as it does now but the missiles do not re-aim after launch. Instead they travel to the location the mech was when they were launched. If the mech has moved, the missile miss, if not they connect per-normal.

I'm also proposing that the missiles travel faster (I believe they're currently about 100 m/s, I suggest 500 m/s) and that they have a fixed arc of travel based on the distance to make computing blocking obstacles easier for the server and a human attempting to visibly discern if the missiles they want to fire will reach the target or not.

Make sense? Yes, I know LRM will be less accurate than they are now, but they'll also be unaffected my ECM (other than to prevent TD sharing and disabling Artemis).

[focuspark]

@Fut

Yeah, that was a poor choice of words there. I meant "mostly useless" in comparison to how useful fully-guided-missile-lock-on-from-behind-cover-with-no-danger-to-the-attacker is today.

[Theobald Hauser]

But it isn't. You're playing some october build or what ?

[focuspark]

Amarius, on 23 January 2013 - 12:06 PM, said:

But it isn't. You're playing some october build or what ?

What isn't? Your response is far to vague for me respond properly. I'd really like the chance to convince you that I'm on to something here, but I can't unless I know what "it" is.

[Theobald Hauser]

Quote

fully-guided-missile-lock-on-from-behind-cover-with-no-danger-to-the-attacker is today.

It isn't without dangers. I've already said why just here in the same thread ten minutes ago.

No, you won't convince me that you're on something. You can't make turn-based gameplay elements in a realtime game.
You can't repeat it ad mortem on twelve distinct threads and make reality bend. IT WON'T WORK.

Edited by Amarius, 23 January 2013 - 12:23 PM.

[Fut]

focuspark, on 23 January 2013 - 11:56 AM, said:

Basically, I'm proposing that when using LRM for indirect fire LRM works just as it does now but the missiles do not re-aim after launch. Instead they travel to the location the mech was when they were launched. If the mech has moved, the missile miss, if not they connect per-normal.

This would equate to the vast majority of missiles missing, as most people try not to stand still for any length of time - especially not for the duration of a 1000m flight from LRMs.

[focuspark]

First I'm not taking turn based gameplay into an FPS. I've never played CBT or TT anything. I'm looking for solutions to what I see is a huge problem with how MW:O is designed today and referencing CBT as much as possible since this is a BattleTech/MechWarrior game after all.

LRM usage today is without danger. The fact that you might get stuck in a brawl without a brawler mech is another issue completely. Any long range mech is at a loss at close range, but being able to fire on an opponent when the opponent has no chance to fire back is unfair. It might be realistic, but it's unfair and this is a game which means it's designed to be fun for all parties.

As for repeating my opinion, why not? I honestly feel that due to alpha netcode being in beta people are overly reliant on guided missile lock on, which I feel is the reason ECM was designed the way it is. Since I feel ECM is unbalanced, I need to find solution to the problem ECM was trying to fix: guided missile lock on, which is fixing netcode. Netcode fixes are inbound, it's time to fix guided missile lock on and ECM as well.

This is part of the "put up or shut up" part that I'm getting right. Even if my solution isn't the one the developers chose, at least I tried and didn't just ***** about something.

Fut, on 23 January 2013 - 12:30 PM, said:

This would equate to the vast majority of missiles missing, as most people try not to stand still for any length of time - especially not for the duration of a 1000m flight from LRMs.

Agreed. Most missiles would miss at long range if the missile speeds remained the same. But if the flight duration were reduced to 2 seconds from the 10 seconds they take now, more would hit. Also, I find that Gauss and PPC snipers stand still a lot and they're the perfect targets for LRM fire.

IMO LRM should not be the answer to light mechs or the OP mess people raved about before ECM nerf'd LRM into a hole.

Edited by focuspark, 23 January 2013 - 12:35 PM.