161 replies to this topic

[Theobald Hauser]

Both are games. Some rules apply to all games. It's even a design and a mathematical branches.
Furthermore this video game is really, really heavily based on the TT game, it only differs when the realtime nature force the devs to make changes.

Given the Total War quote, I'm okay with needed re-locking between salvos. Random hits allocations is already on the go, according to the devs, so that's done.


Edit: They should hit all the time, that's the whole point with this weapon system.
And please stop all those "no-skill" arguing, it doesn't take any skill to have an ECM or be so quick that you're always behing someone that cannot do anything.

Edited by Amarius, 24 January 2013 - 06:26 AM.

[Bobzilla]

Amarius, on 24 January 2013 - 06:22 AM, said:

Both are games. Some rules apply to all games. It's even a design and a mathematical branches.
Furthermore this video game is really, really heavily based on the TT game, it only differs when the realtime nature force the devs to make changes.

Given the Total War quote, I'm okay with needed re-locking between salvos. Random hits allocations is already on the go, according to the devs, so that's done.


Edit: They should hit all the time, that's the whole point with this weapon system.
And please stop all those "no-skill" arguing, it doesn't take any skill to have an ECM or be so quick that you're always behing someone that cannot do anything.

Its a matter of opinion. I feel that if you can fire a weapon that will hit 100% of the time, it shouldn't be so easy to gain a lock. I feel that if a weapon can easily be used effectively without the use of your mouse, its too easy to use. I'm not saying to make it really difficult, just not really easy.
Manualy aiming a laser or ballistic or dumbfire missle replaced the 'to hit roll'.
You should still need to make a 'to hit roll' with streaks to gain a lock, perhaps needing to keep the cross hairs on target, not the entire reticule. If you had to re-lock after every salvo, it would just be the same as upping the reload time as it is simple to gain a lock.

As for using ECM, no, that takes no skill. Always staying behind a target, that does take some skill.

[Strum Wealh]

Syllogy, on 24 January 2013 - 05:58 AM, said:

When are you people going to learn that BattleTech is a Board Game, and not a Video Game?

When the Devs change the title of the game, as well as when they explicitly and unequivocally state that the game will no longer in any way be based on the BattleTech/MechWarrior franchise (and then actually follow through on such a statement).

-----

In all seriousness, however:

Instituting the tendency for Streak missile systems to break their lock upon firing and the subsequent need to re-acquire the lock before firing again would fit with Paul's intent to "help counter the SSRM effectiveness without having to directly hit damage/cooldown/heat etc".

Specifically, it changes the firing cycle from "Lock -> Fire, Fire, Fire, Fire..." to "Lock, Fire -> Lock, Fire -> Lock, Fire -> Lock, Fire...".
Doing so would make the weapon significantly less "spammy", as the effective rate of fire is then governed not by the cooldown of the weapon (which doesn't necessarily have to change), but on how quickly the 'Mech's Targeting-Tracking System (TTS) can acquire/reacquire the missile lock and how quickly the pilot/player can put the reticle on the target (and for how long they can hold it there).
Even massing them on a single 'Mech (as is typically done on the CPLT-A1) would not change this; while said Streak-boat may be capable of tremendous damage per salvo, the rate at which those salvos are delivered - especially against faster targets, like Lights and some Mediums, that can evade being locked-onto - would decrease, possibly substantially so.

In turn, this would also have the effect of making systems like the Beagle Active Probe and potential future Modules, which could/should/would affect time-to-lock, significantly more valuable to such 'Mechs (which would then need to choose between equipping such things over other tings, and/or equiping such things in favor of compromises to other aspects of their design).

[focuspark]

Critical Fumble, on 24 January 2013 - 06:18 AM, said:

When are you people going to learn that they carbon copied the values from BattleTech, but broke certain things in transiting it across? Things that were, you know, important to the balance of those values.

Which leads to problems like this: http://mwomercs.com/...c/77679-woo-ha/

Personally, I don't care about the actual TT rules but I do think MW:O should attempt to devine rules from the descriptions.

From the BattleTech wiki:
Streak Missile Launcher technology was developed and applied to the SRM-2 by the Terran Hegemony in 2647. It ensures that all missile tubes acquire a target lock before its missiles fire. This improvement upon standard Short-Range Missiles conserves ammunition and eliminates unnecessary heat buildup.

Notice that Streaks are intended to conserve ammo and heat, not guarantee hits. Why not have the MW:O mechanic be the same? If you attempt to fire them and the targeting computer believes you won't hit anything because you're aiming into space or aim directly at a moving mech without enough lead, it prevents the launch of the missiles, waste of ammo, and build up of heat.

Think as Streak SRM as SRM with training wheels.

[MaddMaxx]

Seeing as that "Woo-ha" video was "Posted 27 November 2012" and things have changed quite a bit since. Although it is funny to watch, it is not really pertinent to the discussion.

[blinkin]

i think streaks should be much harder to maintain lock than they are now.

i have said it before but i think they would be best as a laser guided weapon of sorts.

• it cannot fire unless the reticle is on a target
  
• missiles fly directly towards the component the reticle is pointed at even if it moves
  
• missiles stream out one at a time (this would add in damage spread)
  
• if the reticle moves off a target then the missiles continue to fly straight on their last trajectory

Edited by blinkin, 24 January 2013 - 11:48 AM.

[focuspark]

blinkin, on 24 January 2013 - 11:48 AM, said:

i think streaks should be much harder to maintain lock than they are now.

i have said it before but i think they would be best as a laser guided weapon of sorts.

• it cannot fire unless the reticle is on a target
  
• missiles fly directly towards the component the reticle is pointed at even if it moves
  
• missiles stream out one at a time (this would add in damage spread)
  
• if the reticle moves off a target then the missiles continue to fly straight on their last trajectory

I've been advocating dropping the lock on for just preventing the missiles from firing if you'll miss, but I did see another suggestion that was pretty good.

Keep SSRM basically as they are now except break lock on after each shot and missile hit a random (no control here) non-head location.

That would make them even with SRM2 which can be guided to specific location kinda, but don't always hit.

[machine]

ManDaisy, on 23 January 2013 - 08:55 PM, said:

Sadly I dont see a future for non ECM lights mechs if streaks continue with their 100% hit rate.
SSRM 6 is on its way and when one of unfair advantages of lights is fixed (the lag shield), the bandaid of SSRMs 100% hit rate should be removed. The reappearance of knockdown should also play a heavy role in rebalancing.

Jump is also inadversly affected by the streak 100% hit decision. Many feel the jump is too weak, this may have been because of the poptarting and 100% accuracy os SSRMS in combination with catapults. If 100% streak hitting is removed then jump can once again be more dynamic, giving heavier mechs back their jump potential and making lighter jumping mechs shine even more.

All in all I feel 100% streak accuracy is doing a disservice to every light mech in the game apart from the ECM variants.

I came into this post prepared to slap someone... instead GOOD POINTS -> expecially the Jumps being weaksauce.

[Theobald Hauser]

Bobzilla, on 24 January 2013 - 08:46 AM, said:

Its a matter of opinion. I feel that if you can fire a weapon that will hit 100% of the time, it shouldn't be so easy to gain a lock. I feel that if a weapon can easily be used effectively without the use of your mouse, its too easy to use. I'm not saying to make it really difficult, just not really easy.

As for using ECM, no, that takes no skill. Always staying behind a target, that does take some skill.

It's not easy to gain lock, not with so many ECMs in each game. Sometimes you can't fire a streak at all from the whole game.

You do need to somewhat move your mouse to lock.

Staying behind when you move quicker than the torso twist from someone, that's not really more skill than targeting the lock-on reticule.

Strum Wealh, on 24 January 2013 - 09:11 AM, said:

Specifically, it changes the firing cycle from "Lock -> Fire, Fire, Fire, Fire..." to "Lock, Fire -> Lock, Fire -> Lock, Fire -> Lock, Fire...".
Doing so would make the weapon significantly less "spammy", as the effective rate of fire is then governed not by the cooldown of the weapon (which doesn't necessarily have to change), but on how quickly the 'Mech's Targeting-Tracking System (TTS) can acquire/reacquire the missile lock and how quickly the pilot/player can put the reticle on the target (and for how long they can hold it there).
Even massing them on a single 'Mech (as is typically done on the CPLT-A1) would not change this; while said Streak-boat may be capable of tremendous damage per salvo, the rate at which those salvos are delivered - especially against faster targets, like Lights and some Mediums, that can evade being locked-onto - would decrease, possibly substantially so.

I think there's not ever matter to argue about there. They will be "lock-on-after-each-shooting".
It's easy, elegant, lore-friendly and easy to implement.

Quote

In turn, this would also have the effect of making systems like the Beagle Active Probe and potential future Modules, which could/should/would affect time-to-lock, significantly more valuable to such 'Mechs (which would then need to choose between equipping such things over other tings, and/or equiping such things in favor of compromises to other aspects of their design).

BAPs don't give quicker lock-on, they give quicker target info acquisition. Sadly not the same thing.

focuspark, on 24 January 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

*same nonsense than in every thread Focuspark is copy/pasting the exact same text, about ten times today only*

SRMs are guided. SSRMS are sureshot-guided. Learn to read. Or stop lying. It's on the frigging page you're linking.


PS: Streaks are the dedicated anti-lights weapons. Stop making lights invincible. Only some rare builds are really dangerous with streaks, the Streakat and the Strealker. They do nothing to other than lights (well, the Streakat at least). You're a light, you see some specialized lighthunter, you run. That's as simple as that.
I don't hear lights complaining about LRMs unable to fend off or run against lights and mediums in their back. I even don't hear LRMs whining about ECMs ! And THAT is specialized-against-them builds !

Edited by Amarius, 24 January 2013 - 04:56 PM.

[ManDaisy]

SSRMS are not dedicated anti lights weapons just like the LBX is not a shotgun. I dare you to find proof of your claims from a valid source.

In any case, answer this. With lagshields fixed ... IS there really any reason to have a 100% hit probability weapon? Lrms are also a false example as they are nowhere near 100% hit and are not an instant kill for a specific mech weight <35 tons.

To the players out there hugging their SSRMS, they will be rebalanced to have a miss chance sooner or later as player social engineering is already pointing to any light mechs without ECM as being unacceptable.

The love for the SSRM 100% hit is hurting the game's light mech variation, hurting jump, and hurting the game.

Edited by ManDaisy, 24 January 2013 - 06:09 PM.

[Yiazmat]

I'm with the idea that streaks should be a little more like how TT ( as I understand, never played it) worked with all attacks. When you fire them, they seek out 2 (2 missiles in each shot) random points on the mech their targeting. If there is another mech commponet in front of the part it's tracking, then it would hit that. Say the missile is headed for the right arm (randomized) but the mech is faceing to your left, it would hit the left arm or left torso instead. Or it could fly at your head. This would really make the spread dmg out and keep streaks from CTing the crap out of everything.

[Solis Obscuri]

Glythe, on 24 January 2013 - 12:28 AM, said:

2. SSRM really don't add much damage except against fast moving targets. If we go back to less than 100% hit rate then we need to change them back to only hitting the center torso for balance purposes.

Not entirely - the really handy thing about SSRMs is that (ton for ton) they tend to group lots of damage in the CT. Regardless of the angle they are fired at. While on a hardpoint basis they don't have the raw damage output for stripping armor off large, slow targets that SRMs do, they can't be as readily mitigated as... well, every other weapon in the game can by twisting around to take shots in the arms and other torso areas. They also give a big benefit to fast 'mechs since they still hit the torso reliably when you're going to fast to take good shots with other weapons.

Case in point, last night my AWS-8T got engaged in a fight with a COM-2D in close - his three SSRM-2s vs. my four Medium Lasers. I lost my RT after about 6-7 volleys of his SSRMs and was cored within 2 or 3 more - meanwhile, despite tearing him up a bit, the Commando was down to just red and orange armor. I'd hit him nearly as often as he hit me, but I couldn't keep the lasers focused on a single area, and 20 damage spread across arms, legs, fronts and rear torsos doesn't add up as fast the 15 damage SSRMs that were only hitting front RT and CT over and over and over, never-miss weapons burning 124 armor off two torso sections vs. mostly-hit weapons trying to scorch 160 damage off an entire 'mech.

Strum Wealh, on 24 January 2013 - 09:11 AM, said:

When the Devs change the title of the game, as well as when they explicitly and unequivocally state that the game will no longer in any way be based on the BattleTech/MechWarrior franchise (and then actually follow through on such a statement).

-----

In all seriousness, however:

Instituting the tendency for Streak missile systems to break their lock upon firing and the subsequent need to re-acquire the lock before firing again would fit with Paul's intent to "help counter the SSRM effectiveness without having to directly hit damage/cooldown/heat etc".

Specifically, it changes the firing cycle from "Lock -> Fire, Fire, Fire, Fire..." to "Lock, Fire -> Lock, Fire -> Lock, Fire -> Lock, Fire...".
Doing so would make the weapon significantly less "spammy", as the effective rate of fire is then governed not by the cooldown of the weapon (which doesn't necessarily have to change), but on how quickly the 'Mech's Targeting-Tracking System (TTS) can acquire/reacquire the missile lock and how quickly the pilot/player can put the reticle on the target (and for how long they can hold it there).
Even massing them on a single 'Mech (as is typically done on the CPLT-A1) would not change this; while said Streak-boat may be capable of tremendous damage per salvo, the rate at which those salvos are delivered - especially against faster targets, like Lights and some Mediums, that can evade being locked-onto - would decrease, possibly substantially so.

In turn, this would also have the effect of making systems like the Beagle Active Probe and potential future Modules, which could/should/would affect time-to-lock, significantly more valuable to such 'Mechs (which would then need to choose between equipping such things over other tings, and/or equiping such things in favor of compromises to other aspects of their design).

I like your ideas, Strum - you should come hang out in my missile thread!

[Theobald Hauser]

Quote

SSRMS are not dedicated anti lights weapons just like the LBX is not a shotgun. I dare you to find proof of your claims from a valid source.

By essence they are. I'm speaking of MWO, not TT. Well, in TT they're no less efficient against lights. In MWO lights have HUGE advantages they didn't have in TT. And Streaks are a counter.

Quote

In any case, answer this. With lagshields fixed ... IS there really any reason to have a 100% hit probability weapon? Lrms are also a false example as they are nowhere near 100% hit and are not an instant kill for a specific mech weight <35 tons.

With lagshield fixed, Streaks won't be BETTER. They'll even be less useful, as other weapons do their job.
Streaks instakill for lights ? You're KIDDING ? Are you playing the same game that us ? Your lights only have 5 armor+infra points ?

Invincible lights hurt the game far more than streaks.

And streaks are already hitting side torsos and arms (due to rotation). And they are worked on to target legs and arms too, as the dev team has said again and again. Stop advocating your lights till then.

[Solis Obscuri]

Yiazmat, on 24 January 2013 - 06:21 PM, said:

I'm with the idea that streaks should be a little more like how TT ( as I understand, never played it) worked with all attacks. When you fire them, they seek out 2 (2 missiles in each shot) random points on the mech their targeting. If there is another mech commponet in front of the part it's tracking, then it would hit that. Say the missile is headed for the right arm (randomized) but the mech is faceing to your left, it would hit the left arm or left torso instead. Or it could fly at your head. This would really make the spread dmg out and keep streaks from CTing the crap out of everything.

Ok, short sidetrack to TT - canonically all missiles were supposed to be guided unless explicitly stated to be otherwise (MRMs, Rocket Pods, and Deadfire Missiles). The catch was they didn't always get a good lock, so they had the same to-hit chances as any other weapon - meaning a salvo of LRMs or SRMs might miss a moving target just as readily as a Medium Laser or PPC. And if they did hit, not all the missiles necessarily locked on or made it there, so there was a second roll against a cluster hit table. And then damage was distributes - 5 point increments for LRMs, 2 point (single missile) groupings for SRMs. Basically this allowed missiles to have a much better maximum damage-per-tonnage and damage-per-heat ratio (respectively) than ballistic and energy weapons, since the median damage per weight and heat was fairly close when you averaged out all those rolls, and it was distributed more widely to boot (though that wasn't always a bad thing for crit-seeking ).

The point of SSRMs was that they had a somewhat better seeker on the missile, and a much much better fire control system built-in. So if you didn't make your to-hit roll, the system just didn't fire (saving ammo and preventing needless heat build-up), and if you did hit, you automatically aced your cluster-hit roll (all missiles hit), though the locations of hits were still randomized.

And yeah, TT never really tried to balance Succession Wars Tech vs LosTech on any kind of per-weapon basis (BV did this to a large degree though for making "even" matches), which is why pretty much every type of autocannon evaporates from the field once the Gauss Rifle, UAC/5 and LBxAC/10 come out, but SSRM-2s aren't a total terror on the battlefield - they're just more efficient - ton per ton two SSRM-2s match a SRM-6 in weight and average damage output, but don't waste shots or heat build-up. They're actually fairly well balanced.

As for the Clan versions... well, Clan Tech was pretty much designed to "break the game", albeit in interesting ways - which is why notions like the Batchall (BV balancing matches I.S. 3050 assault 'mechs with Clan medium Omnis), Zellbrigen (single combat instead of more efficient focused-fire), and avoidance of physical attacks all function into the Clan lore (and mystique).

Edited by Solis Obscuri, 24 January 2013 - 06:46 PM.

[Theobald Hauser]

My god, this focuspark sickness is spreading.
Why are people believing that battletech missiles aren't guided ?

[CancR]

I gave up figuring out what focusspark is trying to say.

In battle tech streaks where an interesting thing as they may of always hit, but really they replaced one way of rolling to hit with another as you had to make a piloting roll if I remember correctly to get a target lock. They only real difference this provided is that ammo wont ever be wasted.

[Critical Fumble]

MaddMaxx, on 24 January 2013 - 11:24 AM, said:

Seeing as that "Woo-ha" video was "Posted 27 November 2012" and things have changed quite a bit since. Although it is funny to watch, it is not really pertinent to the discussion.

Not a huge amount really. I think streaks might spread more, and ECM has made SSRM cats less frequent. But the streakboat is still very much alive, notice 3x SSRM ECM Commandos and Ravens with a similar setup. The streakcat lives as well, you just have to have ECCM buddies and you too can say "SO MUCH SKILL!"

focuspark, on 24 January 2013 - 10:02 AM, said:

Personally, I don't care about the actual TT rules but I do think MW:O should attempt to devine rules from the descriptions.

From the BattleTech wiki:
Streak Missile Launcher technology was developed and applied to the SRM-2 by the Terran Hegemony in 2647. It ensures that all missile tubes acquire a target lock before its missiles fire. This improvement upon standard Short-Range Missiles conserves ammunition and eliminates unnecessary heat buildup.

Notice that Streaks are intended to conserve ammo and heat, not guarantee hits. Why not have the MW:O mechanic be the same? If you attempt to fire them and the targeting computer believes you won't hit anything because you're aiming into space or aim directly at a moving mech without enough lead, it prevents the launch of the missiles, waste of ammo, and build up of heat.

Think as Streak SRM as SRM with training wheels.

I think of it more as a safety, because there are situations where SSRMs are the better choice, and situations where SRMs are a better choice. Particularly at the very edge of their effective range SSRMs will be your friend.

[focuspark]

CancR, on 24 January 2013 - 08:24 PM, said:

I gave up figuring out what focusspark is trying to say.

In battle tech streaks where an interesting thing as they may of always hit, but really they replaced one way of rolling to hit with another as you had to make a piloting roll if I remember correctly to get a target lock. They only real difference this provided is that ammo wont ever be wasted.

All I've been trying to say is that SSRM are unbalanced when compared to SRM and other weapon systems. It should be a choice between SRM2 and SSRM2 and today there's no choice because SSRM is vastly better. That's not balanced.

As for how SSRM get balanced, I don't really care - I've just been suggesting ways in hope that something gets done.

Amarius, on 24 January 2013 - 07:19 PM, said:

My god, this focuspark sickness is spreading.
Why are people believing that battletech missiles aren't guided ?

Because they miss - a lot. Just as much as ballistic rounds, which aren't guided.

[Solis Obscuri]

focuspark, on 24 January 2013 - 08:49 PM, said:

Because they miss - a lot. Just as much as ballistic rounds, which aren't guided.

Only a specific type of SRM and LRM ordinance used in an outdated set of 3rd-level rules was unguided:
http://www.sarna.net...d-Fire_Missiles
Decreased accuracy was reflected by lower cluster-hit rolls.

Although MRMs and Rockets are also unguided:
http://www.sarna.net...m_Range_Missile
http://www.sarna.net...Rocket_Launcher
These simply receive a +1 on all to-hit modifiers.

Apparently the guys at FASA had some notion of autocannons with fast projectiles, good fire-control systems, and no half-second delay on firing...

[Theobald Hauser]

Quote

All I've been trying to say is that SSRM are unbalanced when compared to SRM and other weapon systems. It should be a choice between SRM2 and SSRM2 and today there's no choice because SSRM is vastly better. That's not balanced.

1- Of course theyre are, SRMs 2 are lighter than SSRMs 2

2- It's the other way around boy. You're proving that SRMS ARE UNDEPOWERED, and that they SHOULD be partially guided, and you're still trying to nerf Streaks.

Quote

As for how SSRM get balanced, I don't really care - I've just been suggesting ways in hope that something gets done.

You're working on the premise that streaks are OP, when they aren't. All lights-streaks problems stem from ECM, and nothing else. And no, ECM shouldn't be removed, and even not nerfed too.
Speaking of that, I'm startled that you're not invading my own suggestion thread about some streaks-ranting too, given you're doing it on everybody elses' threads. You do hate me as much ? :'(

Quote

Because they miss - a lot. Just as much as ballistic rounds, which aren't guided.

STOP.
LYING.
Streaks never miss. That's their POINT. They CAN'T FIRE if they're not sure to HIT.

Edited by Amarius, 25 January 2013 - 12:13 AM.