20 replies to this topic

[Jakob Knight]

This suggestion is one I had previously been very much against, but the game has changed radically since that time, and I find myself now putting this forth with the following reasons.

The inclusion of ECM removed the practical ability of the LRM to be a standoff weapon to be fired indirectly at opponents. Prior to ECM, the minimum range was an excellent tradeoff for the long range and indirect capabilities, and so had it's place.

Now, however, all of the counter-tactics to ECM by the Devs are targetted at LRMs as direct-fire weapons with much reduced ranges and almost no indirect fire capability. Since LRMs are now to be treated as direct-fire weapons with ranges less than that of an ERPPC, then the need for the minimum range as a balancing factor is now gone and, in fact, needs to be removed to have LRMs function as direct-fire weapons in typical engagement conditions.

Short of implementing a way for LRM mechs to nullify the ECM ability to prevent lock-ons outside of 200m without sacrificing far more firepower, effort, and tonnage than the ECM mechs do to render LRMs combat unusable (TAG is direct-fire and does not work past the time the firing mech loses its aim on the target, and the range-increase module does not extend any useful distance against ECM), this is the best way I see to restore LRMs to parity with other weapons of their size on the battlefield. Since it seems any suggestions to provide such ECM-piercing ability to comparable equipment to the ECM systems is being ignored/thrown away, I am forced to suggest this alternative.

If the Devs want to treat LRMs as direct-fire weapons, then give them the abilities of direct-fire weapons.

Edited by Jakob Knight, 28 January 2013 - 05:50 AM.

[Corralis]

No being able to dumb-fire an LRM 20 would do tremendous damage and be OP, they would have to reduce the damage by about 75% in dumb fire mode to stop that. Basically what you want is an all powerful weapon that can fire and do damage at anything from 0-1000 metres. Nah LRM's are fine and if you play with teammates then you should be exactly 200 metres behind them at all times so they can support you if you get in trouble. That's the risk/reward of using LRM's I'm afraid.

[MasterGoa]

Having an LRM boat in my stable, I have to agree with Corralis.

I have been frustrated many times by LRMs being useless
under 180M, but that is the name of the game.

If not, I will go with SRMs...

Use TAG and put yourself out of harms way.

Understand that where you put yourself on a map will
dictate how good you will have visual access to your targets.

Also, remember that targets fight what is close first, so use this window
of opportunity and use it well!

[Mechteric]

A visual indicator that the LRM is below minimum range would be great (maybe a yellow lock indicator instead of red when within that range), at least it would help new players realize whats going on. I just met a poor sap in an Atlas with all LRMs yesterday standing there firing at me at 100 meters. I sent a global tell in chat a few seconds before I finished him off that LRMs don't work that close.

Edited by CapperDeluxe, 28 January 2013 - 08:04 AM.

[Inertiaman]

SSRMS don't fire without lock - I have no idea why LRM's are able to both fire without lock and fire at targets within minrange. Pointless. If you just want to teach trigger control then let SSRMS off the leash as well and at least make it consistent.

[Adridos]

LRMs do that massive damage just because of the fact they have such a big weakness.

You can have your Clan LRMs, but they'd have to be nerfed to 10 damage. Agreed?

[MechWarrior849305]

Inertiaman, on 28 January 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

SSRMS don't fire without lock - I have no idea why LRM's are able to both fire without lock and fire at targets within minrange. Pointless. If you just want to teach trigger control then let SSRMS off the leash as well and at least make it consistent.

You can fire LRMs without lock by purpose to strike somewhat far point on the map, when you suspect that by the time missiles get there - there will be enemy mechs, much like long range SRMs. SSRMs don't have such an option.

[MWHawke]

CapperDeluxe, on 28 January 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

A visual indicator that the LRM is below minimum range would be great (maybe a yellow lock indicator instead of red when within that range), at least it would help new players realize whats going on. I just met a poor sap in an Atlas with all LRMs yesterday standing there firing at me at 100 meters. I sent a global tell in chat a few seconds before I finished him off that LRMs don't work that close.

The indicator is your weapons list.

[Jakob Knight]

I understand what people are saying (as I said, I was very much against this back before ECM as well). However, it seems clear the Devs now consider LRMs direct fire weapons, and their 'counters' for indirect fire pilots are all direct-fire (TAG, dumbfired missiles, ect.). This doesn't just limit LRM use, but eliminates them entirely from their supposed role. I believe that, once they instituted ECM in such a way as to remove almost any LRM use in the game, the reasons for the minimum range also became invalid, so there is no reason to keep it. Especially when LRMs were designed the way they are without consideration of ECM completely removing the ability of the weapon to engage the enemy. If they were balanced before ECM (which they were), then by definition the extreme penalties imposed by ECM upon this weapon system require extreme counter-buffing to restore them to where they are designed to be. Keeping a penalty designed into the weapon to counter its indirect fire abilities after those indirect fire abilities have been removed by the game environment is wrong.

Now, if they put in a way for an LRM unit to defeat ECM prevention of detection and lock-on without the LRM unit needing to sacrifice additional weapons (energy hardpoint), have direct LOS within a significant loss of range (TAG), and with the same extremely light price in tons/crits and no-effort needed operation as ECM, I would never suggest this. However, stating that there is nothing wrong with ECM effects on LRMs because the LRM mech can just shoot the target without a lock, when that fire is also nullified by the minimum range on top of the slow speed of LRMs, is clear indication that something has to change.


As I said, if they want LRMs to be direct-fire, they owe LRM users the same ability to fight at direct-fire ranges they give to other direct-fire support weapons (Gauss Rifles, ACs, ect).

Edited by Jakob Knight, 29 January 2013 - 01:04 PM.

[Postumus]

When ECM came out, nothing about LRMs themselves were changed. Just because ECM exists in the game does not mean that there is a constant ECM bubble covering every map. As soon as that enemy ECM Commando runs off after a butterfly, or gets stomped on by an Atlas, you get free reign with your LRMs. Hell, if your own team counters said Commando, or if they have TAG lasers, then you get to let loose with indirect fire. And now, next week, if someone can nail said Commando with a PPC or two, you get to nuke it or its teammates with indirect LRM fire. In time, there will be more counters as well, but the days of being entitled to 1000 damage just cause you brought a few tons of LRM ammo are over.

As for the "no minimum range requirement", basically what you're asking for are SRMs that can also be fired across the entire map if you want. Just give it a few months, ATMs are coming.

Edited by Postumus, 29 January 2013 - 03:05 PM.

[Pachar]

I agree that ECM to LRM is an issue, but I would suggest fixing ECM rather than change LRMs on a fundamental level.

[Firewuff]

let them dumb fire under 180meters like in the TT but it becomes a "hot load" and if hit before launching can detonate.... ok so you can do 40 points of damage to me, I can blow you up if i fire first..... fairs fair.

[Solis Obscuri]

I think PPC min range penalties is a bigger issue than LRM min range at the moment.

[Postumus]

The whole reason that weapons in this game have minimum ranges is because otherwise there wouldn't be a reason to use a short range weapon. Its part of weapon differentiation, and it means that you have to make decisions about what kind of range profile your loadout will have. In TT, the gauss also had a minimum range, which is one of the reasons why dropping an AC/20 for a gauss wasn't an immediate, 'no-duh' call. Back in closed beta, before the changes to gauss rifle internal structure, thats exactly what people did. Hunchback 4Gs that used AC/20s instead of gauss rifles were laughed at, and then killed, because they were making a poor decision. As for letting LRM's dumbfire? They uh, kind of already do. Since always. But if you want an LRM that can dumbfire at point blank range and do full damage, why would you ever need an SRM?

Edited by Postumus, 29 January 2013 - 07:16 PM.

[Noth]

Just wait for clan LRMs. Until then make your builds so that you aren't defenseless in that deadzone if it is that much of a problem. Oh and enough with these bandaid fixes for ECM. ECM needs fixed instead of changing everything else in the game to fit it. Much less work to do and much less issue of creating even more balance problems.

Edited by Noth, 29 January 2013 - 07:44 PM.

[Solis Obscuri]

Postumus, on 29 January 2013 - 07:16 PM, said:

The whole reason that weapons in this game have minimum ranges is because otherwise there wouldn't be a reason to use a short range weapon.  Its part of weapon differentiation, and it means that you have to make  decisions about what kind of range profile your loadout will have.  In TT, the gauss also had a minimum range, which is one of the reasons why dropping an AC/20 for a gauss wasn't an immediate, 'no-duh' call.  Back in closed beta, before the changes to gauss rifle internal structure, thats exactly what people did.  Hunchback 4Gs that used AC/20s instead of gauss rifles were laughed at, and then killed, because they were making a poor decision.  As for letting LRM's dumbfire? They uh, kind of already do.  Since always.  But if you want an LRM that can dumbfire at point blank range and do full damage, why would you ever need an SRM?

Canonically SRMs are guided. AC/20s are a lot more effective than Gauss Rifles at close range due to higher damage output per weight, and have always been a good option. In general, close range weapons hit harder for their tonnage and are more heat efficient per their damage output than long range weapons - firing a PPC at 100m is less heat efficient than firing a pair of medium medium lasers or even large lasers per the damage output. Not to mention that two medium lasers weigh 29% of one PPC. Not of course, that any of that points to point-blank LRM firing as a necessity.

[Nth Adonis]

Jakob Knight, on 28 January 2013 - 05:48 AM, said:

This suggestion is one I had previously been very much against, but the game has changed radically since that time, and I find myself now putting this forth with the following reasons.

The inclusion of ECM removed the practical ability of the LRM to be a standoff weapon to be fired indirectly at opponents. Prior to ECM, the minimum range was an excellent tradeoff for the long range and indirect capabilities, and so had it's place.

Now, however, all of the counter-tactics to ECM by the Devs are targetted at LRMs as direct-fire weapons with much reduced ranges and almost no indirect fire capability. Since LRMs are now to be treated as direct-fire weapons with ranges less than that of an ERPPC, then the need for the minimum range as a balancing factor is now gone and, in fact, needs to be removed to have LRMs function as direct-fire weapons in typical engagement conditions.

Short of implementing a way for LRM mechs to nullify the ECM ability to prevent lock-ons outside of 200m without sacrificing far more firepower, effort, and tonnage than the ECM mechs do to render LRMs combat unusable (TAG is direct-fire and does not work past the time the firing mech loses its aim on the target, and the range-increase module does not extend any useful distance against ECM), this is the best way I see to restore LRMs to parity with other weapons of their size on the battlefield. Since it seems any suggestions to provide such ECM-piercing ability to comparable equipment to the ECM systems is being ignored/thrown away, I am forced to suggest this alternative.

If the Devs want to treat LRMs as direct-fire weapons, then give them the abilities of direct-fire weapons.

I think its a great idea once all mechs are able to equip ECM. Plus since LRMs are more of a kiddie weapon like streaks(no skill required) you could just get rid of streaks since a no min damage LRM would do the same thing. Good Call!

[Roboblaster]

CapperDeluxe, on 28 January 2013 - 08:03 AM, said:

A visual indicator that the LRM is below minimum range would be great (maybe a yellow lock indicator instead of red when within that range), at least it would help new players realize whats going on. I just met a poor sap in an Atlas with all LRMs yesterday standing there firing at me at 100 meters. I sent a global tell in chat a few seconds before I finished him off that LRMs don't work that close.

Inertiaman, on 28 January 2013 - 08:05 AM, said:

SSRMS don't fire without lock - I have no idea why LRM's are able to both fire without lock and fire at targets within minrange. Pointless. If you just want to teach trigger control then let SSRMS off the leash as well and at least make it consistent.

I aggree to both of these ideas. I ended up wasting a bunch of LRM the other day cause I thought the target was farther away then it was. It would be nice to have it not fire when in a distance that it can't do damage like the SSRM's. It works good seeing the target symble turn yellow and then your SSRM's don't fire. LRM's should be same way.

Edited by Roboblaster, 30 January 2013 - 02:05 AM.

[o0Marduk0o]

Jakob Knight, on 29 January 2013 - 12:58 PM, said:

I understand what people are saying (as I said, I was very much against this back before ECM as well). However, it seems clear the Devs now consider LRMs direct fire weapons, and their 'counters' for indirect fire pilots are all direct-fire (TAG, dumbfired missiles, ect.).

Uhm, you have teammates, they can TAG for you and then you have indirect fire again - well, nothing has changed there since beginning.

[sC4r]

so instead of mounting 3xsrm6 that are only able to do dmg to targets till 270m i will mount an lrm15 and lrm5 which will slightly less dmg at short range but will also have long range support?

YES PLEASE!!!
</sarcasm>

absolutely no man... thats only lrm20 i describe above can you imagine what would stalker boat do with like 75 missiles per salvo? that has the firepower to one shot atlas... yes you read this correct
lrm is fine as it is and when they finally do this (about ppc)
http://mwomercs.com/...28#entry1812228

they will make some comeback