67 replies to this topic

[Tennex]

i think its nice that the devs are electing to make a fix. rather than letting the forums nag them into a fix. let thomas do his thing.

chances are voluntary fixes will be better than forced fixes

[DocBach]

verybad, on 01 February 2013 - 10:23 AM, said:

SO yeah, the spiraling flightpath is kind of cool (though less realistic IMO than the current one) but I really don't see why you're spending time on stuff like that now.

For sure, I don't think the vortex flight path looks realistic at all. I like the uneven spinning and corkscrewing, patternless and random missile clouds instead.

[LaserAngel]

Itkovian, on 01 February 2013 - 10:17 AM, said:

I wouldn't know. By recently I mean 2 weeks ago, been using it since. If I'm direct firing my LRMs, then I have TAG on target, making my LRMs quite accurate, usually hitting the same location I'm striking with PPCs.

Since that switch my performance has improved significantly, as getting ECMed does not stop me from using my PPCs... and the focus on direct fire leads to frequent TAG locks and accurate LRMs.

If I could fit artemis I would do it, mind you, but the direct fire boost is more useful with ECM in its current state. Mind you, the new artemis formation might make it worth the tonnage.

Also, in this age of ECM I find that one no longer needs massive ammo bins for LRMs. 3 or 4 tons tend to be enough, when not running a strict LRM boat at least. But then again I think balanced mechs are more useful than LRM boats these days (Especially in 8-mans).

I didn't strictly mean to single you out but I have seen some people running with dual PPC and LRM 15 Catapults. I was dropping with my 4-man and they called out "it's those PPC guys again".

I'd get Artemis lock and drop it in on them from the sky while they're not even locked on me. You're going to lose the LRM fight against someone with Artemis and more so with modules. They'll have missiles in the air and can break into cover before you even have a chance to fire. The lock-on time reduction is of great benefit. I'm running around with 4 tons too. I could almost get by with 3 but with TAG I can drop a DHS for ammo.

[Jman5]

So what is going to happen when we have Artemis + TAG? Is it going to be even tighter than that? This new tighter grouping seems really dangerous from a balance/fun perspective. I'm also concerned that it will hurt new player experience. I remember the first week I played, LRMs were really popular and beyond frustrating. I was stuck hiding behind a hill half the game because 100 missiles would eviscerate my chest if I moved out. Then they nerfed them a bit, were used by fewer people, and I got better at dodging them.

However, how many people are going to get slammed by volleys of death from 1000 meters game after game and just quit out of frustration?

If you make them too good, you will have LRM/TAG + PPC sniper teams dominate. LRM/TAG + PPC disrupt will break up any ECM and missiles will mop them up.

Tread carefully PGI.

[Yankee77]

LaserAngel, on 01 February 2013 - 11:02 AM, said:

I didn't strictly mean to single you out but I have seen some people running with dual PPC and LRM 15 Catapults. I was dropping with my 4-man and they called out "it's those PPC guys again".

I'd get Artemis lock and drop it in on them from the sky while they're not even locked on me. You're going to lose the LRM fight against someone with Artemis and more so with modules. They'll have missiles in the air and can break into cover before you even have a chance to fire. The lock-on time reduction is of great benefit. I'm running around with 4 tons too. I could almost get by with 3 but with TAG I can drop a DHS for ammo.

Then no, that's not us. I'm the only one using this build that I know of, with a few exceptions.

As for winning the LRM fight, that wouldn't be an issue, as I wouldn't be trying to win that fight. I use my LRMs primarily as direct-fire backups to my PPCs, and secondarily as indirect fire when solid locks offer themselves. Essentially my mech is more of a sniper/medium range brawler that also does some indirect fire as necessary. LRMs will be shot when I've got PPCs and TAG on target already. Besides, if you're in a position to duck behind cover, odds are I wouldn't even bother with LRMs and just hit with my PPCs.

That said, Artemis does not make that much of a difference in lock times that you somehow can get your missiles on target before he can get his own lock and duck in cover. LRMs still take a while to travel, and if someone stands there and lets the missiles hits them, it has nothing to do with them not having Artemis.

It DOES give you the chance to hit them first and find cover before his do as well, but that's just your target either not caring or not playing well. After all, if both of you had Artemis (or didn't have it), you'd then just be playing a case of LRM chicken and would either both hit each other or miss as you both dropped behind cover.

Not that LRM fights make much sense, IMO. Unless one (or more) of the mechs involved have no cover nearby, its mostly a waste of ammo. The main value for lobbing LRMs at another LRM mech is to suppress it for a bit, as you _know_ it's going to find cover. Overall, LRMs are better used on the enemy line to support your brawlers.

That said, I quite agree that if your goal is to use LRMs as your primary weapon, you should get Artemis. It's an excellent upgrade. But the current ECM environment makes boating LRMs iffy at best (in 8-mans at least... unless your entire team is built to support LRMs of course). For now, I prefer using them as a complement to direct-fire weaponry (and I was using PPCs even before we knew about the coming buff).

Thank you.

[Yankee77]

Jman5, on 01 February 2013 - 11:13 AM, said:

So what is going to happen when we have Artemis + TAG? Is it going to be even tighter than that? This new tighter grouping seems really dangerous from a balance/fun perspective. I'm also concerned that it will hurt new player experience. I remember the first week I played, LRMs were really popular and beyond frustrating. I was stuck hiding behind a hill half the game because 100 missiles would eviscerate my chest if I moved out. Then they nerfed them a bit, were used by fewer people, and I got better at dodging them.

Before I took off my Artemis and upgraded to PPCs, I had both Artemis and TAG to narrow down my LRM spread.

This meant that if there wasn't any ECM involved, my LRMs hit a tagged target with pinpoint precision. It was quite impressive, and extremely lethal.

Problem is that even in 4-mans I was rolling the dice every drop. If running into a lot of ECM my LRMs wouldn't be nearly as effective, and if there wasn't ECM I'd rack up ludicrous numbers.

Now that I took out Artemis and up-gunned to PPCs, my performance is a lot less dependent on ECM, and on average significantly better (especially in 8-mans).

Thank you.

[LaserAngel]

Itkovian, on 01 February 2013 - 11:29 AM, said:

Then no, that's not us. I'm the only one using this build that I know of, with a few exceptions.

As for winning the LRM fight, that wouldn't be an issue, as I wouldn't be trying to win that fight. I use my LRMs primarily as direct-fire backups to my PPCs, and secondarily as indirect fire when solid locks offer themselves. Essentially my mech is more of a sniper/medium range brawler that also does some indirect fire as necessary. LRMs will be shot when I've got PPCs and TAG on target already. Besides, if you're in a position to duck behind cover, odds are I wouldn't even bother with LRMs and just hit with my PPCs.

That said, Artemis does not make that much of a difference in lock times that you somehow can get your missiles on target before he can get his own lock and duck in cover. LRMs still take a while to travel, and if someone stands there and lets the missiles hits them, it has nothing to do with them not having Artemis.

It DOES give you the chance to hit them first and find cover before his do as well, but that's just your target either not caring or not playing well. After all, if both of you had Artemis (or didn't have it), you'd then just be playing a case of LRM chicken and would either both hit each other or miss as you both dropped behind cover.

Not that LRM fights make much sense, IMO. Unless one (or more) of the mechs involved have no cover nearby, its mostly a waste of ammo. The main value for lobbing LRMs at another LRM mech is to suppress it for a bit, as you _know_ it's going to find cover. Overall, LRMs are better used on the enemy line to support your brawlers.

That said, I quite agree that if your goal is to use LRMs as your primary weapon, you should get Artemis. It's an excellent upgrade. But the current ECM environment makes boating LRMs iffy at best (in 8-mans at least... unless your entire team is built to support LRMs of course). For now, I prefer using them as a complement to direct-fire weaponry (and I was using PPCs even before we knew about the coming buff).

Thank you.

Perhaps I am overextending my role. I agree that you are better off supporting your own brawlers with LRM fire support. Maybe I like letting the other LRM boat know that I'm there and I'm more capable at what they're doing too. Along with softening them up a little.

Edited by LaserAngel, 01 February 2013 - 11:42 AM.

[OpCentar]

Most impressive videos, it seems that the initial grouping will be much better with the new "rotary" one.

Second video shows how the missiles form a spiral in the final approach to target. Can't wait to try it out!