111 replies to this topic

[Tennex]

The effort to reward ratio was not very well thought out.

Spin fusors required a lot of skill and effor to use, however, after hours of gameplay mastering the spin fusor. you can easily get shot down by an enemy automatic weapon. which just required a bit of leading, where as the spin fuser required the enemy to land on the ground before a hit or preform a very hard blue plate special in the air.

There are a lot of similar issues in this game. For example, the effort required to use LRMs is minimal compared to other weapons. Sure you can say well if someone has ECM its "harder" to use LRMs, but not really. Its situational, either you can use LRMs in the absence of ECM or you can't in the presence of it. theres no middle ground and no skill required. All of this is decided before the match begins.

Similarly in light mech brawling situations. A huge amount of effort is required to down a ECM sSRM raven, in a mech without either of those equipment. And in the end, even if you have the skill, you will likely still die. But for the 3L effort is minimal and reward is great.

[One Medic Army]

The way I view LRMs, the skill required to use them is low, however the skill required to negate them is also low. (Cover, sightlines, minimum range)
SSRMs however cannot be negated via skill.

[PropagandaWar]

Tennex, on 14 February 2013 - 09:12 AM, said:

The effort to reward ratio was not very well thought out.

Spin fusors required a lot of skill and effor to use, however, after hours of gameplay mastering the spin fusor. you can easily get shot down by an enemy automatic weapon. which just required a bit of leading, where as the spin fuser required the enemy to land on the ground before a hit or preform a very hard blue plate special in the air.

There are a lot of similar issues in this game. For example, the effort required to use LRMs is minimal compared to other weapons. Sure you can say well if someone has ECM its "harder" to use LRMs, but not really. Its situational, either you can use LRMs in the absence of ECM or you can't in the presence of it. theres no middle ground and no skill required. All of this is decided before the match begins.

Similarly in light mech brawling situations. A huge amount of effort is required to down a ECM sSRM raven, in a mech without either of those equipment. And in the end, even if you have the skill, you will likely still die. But for the 3L effort is minimal and reward is great.

Thats the one thing I hear about and agree with on lil rhino. That mech has to be the biggest pain in the A$$ to take down. More often then not they arent going fast so are easy to hit. Damage seems to still reg wrong on them etc, etc. Nothings more annoying than seeing 2 srm 6'***** it and nothing happens. With that being said they are working on it so I'll be patient.

Edited by PropagandaWar, 14 February 2013 - 09:28 AM.

[Raalic]

How do you suggest LRMs and SSRMs be fixed?

[MaddMaxx]

Quote

"Its situational, either you can use LRMs in the absence of ECM or you can't in the presence of it. there's no middle ground"

And here I read where TAG cuts through ECM to allow LRM's to be used against a ECM carrying unit. That Patch Note must have been in error I guess.

Edited by MaddMaxx, 14 February 2013 - 09:21 AM.

[Tennex]

One Medic Army, on 14 February 2013 - 09:16 AM, said:

The way I view LRMs, the skill required to use them is low, however the skill required to negate them is also low. (Cover, sightlines, minimum range)
SSRMs however cannot be negated via skill.

but the result is binomial gameplay. where if you bring LRMs, and the enemy has ECM. match is decided before it begins.

disclaimer: i do not boat LRMS

Edited by Tennex, 14 February 2013 - 09:21 AM.

[Orzorn]

That's why SSRMs lock boxes should be reduced to be much smaller, requiring the user to actually be able to point at the target, rather than in its general direction. That's a huge part of why its so easy to use those weapons. A weapon that has a guaranteed hit is fine, but the skill required to use it should at least be as much as it takes to use SRMs of the same damage (an SRM 2).

I can't tell you how many times I've watched SSRM users fight (I'm spectating) lights such as the Spider, have the spider fly by going 150+ kp/h (due to jump jet speed) and the SSRM user keep and maintain a lock the entire time without even keeping their reticule over the target. I measured it one day. The lock box is almost 45 degrees in size on each side. You can look that far away and still have a lock.

MaddMaxx, on 14 February 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

And here I read where TAG cuts through ECM to allow LRM's to be used against a ECM carrying unit. That Patch Note must have been in error I guess.

The lock on time for TAG'd ECM mechs is something like 3-4 seconds, if I recall. Much longer than if ECM wasn't present. Keeping a TAG on an ECM Raven is very difficult. If your TAG leaves the target for more than a second, you lose the lock.

Compare that to how I described SSRMs above, and you can see the disparity.

Edited by Orzorn, 14 February 2013 - 09:24 AM.

[Tennex]

Raalic, on 14 February 2013 - 09:19 AM, said:

How do you suggest LRMs and SSRMs be fixed?

For sSRMs. use a different locking system from LRMs. streaks by definition is a different missile targeting system.

require a relockon for every shot fired.


instead of lock fire, fire, fire , fire
it should be Lock, fire, lock, fire , lock, fire.


each lock would need to be much shorter time than LRM lockon time. lockon timer for sSRMs should not exceed sSRM cooldown time.

Edited by Tennex, 14 February 2013 - 09:26 AM.

[Kaldor]

MaddMaxx, on 14 February 2013 - 09:20 AM, said:

And here I read where TAG cuts through ECM to allow LRM's to be used against a ECM carrying unit. That Patch Note must have been in error I guess.

Yes.

But have you tried holding a TAG on a fast moving light at any range? Against a big as a barn DDC, you can do it, but lights, forget about it.

[Tennex]

Orzorn, on 14 February 2013 - 09:23 AM, said:

I can't tell you how many times I've watched SSRM users fight (I'm spectating) lights such as the Spider, have the spider fly by going 150+ kp/h (due to jump jet speed) and the SSRM user keep and maintain a lock the entire time without even keeping their reticule over the target. I measured it one day. The lock box is almost 45 degrees in size on each side. You can look that far away and still have a lock.

its ridiculous. i play a 3L and i can tell you, once u get that first lock. there is no effort besides pressing the fire button and moving your sights once every 5 minutes to cross the target.

[Raalic]

SSRM lock box is probably a problem. Hit location randomizer is a problem. Biggest problem, imho, is their trajectory, though.Things should have minimal tracking capability, and fly right past a 'mech that is moving up or laterally rapidly. Should really be best when used on a target that is spending most of its time in your LOS as a sort of FAF SRM for lazy people or people who want to preserve ammo.

[Kunae]

Kaldor, on 14 February 2013 - 09:23 AM, said:

Yes. But have you tried holding a TAG on a fast moving light at any range? Against a big as a barn DDC, you can do it, but lights, forget about it.

And it only works if the tag-user is outside of the enemy ECM bubble.

[EmeraldSongbird]

LRMs are what they are, I don't think they need to be fixed. The skill behind them in most cases is determining whether to fire or not based on the enemy's location in relation to cover. If you fire and miss, you give away your location without having anything to show for it.

SSRMs need to have some sort of targeting arc on them. They should be homing missiles, but not 100% hits. There should be some sort of targeting arc where if the enemy gets out of it, your missiles stop homing on them and you lose the lock. This targeting arc is determined by what your mech is facing. A reasonable arc would be, say 90 degrees. That is the only way i can think to fix them.

[Kraven Kor]

SSRM's can be negated by skill, but it is incredibly hard.

You can in fact duck in and out of cover to avoid them. But not if your foe is just as fast as you and able to stay right on your backside or whatever. There have been times I was even successful in using enemy mechs as cover against an opponent with streaks. But it was more "good timing and luck" than skill (the only skill part was seeing what had happened, and trying to keep the enemy mech between me and the other guy with streaks - and said players lack of awareness of what I was doing, moreso.)

[Kunae]

Doobles, on 14 February 2013 - 09:25 AM, said:

SSRMs need to have some sort of targeting arc on them. They should be homing missiles, but not 100% hits. There should be some sort of targeting arc where if the enemy gets out of it, your missiles stop homing on them and you lose the lock. This targeting arc is determined by what your mech is facing. A reasonable arc would be, say 90 degrees. That is the only way i can think to fix them.

No, they need to be removed completely. No "fix" will balance them to everyone's satisfaction.

[Tennex]

Kraven Kor, on 14 February 2013 - 09:25 AM, said:

SSRM's can be negated by skill, but it is incredibly hard.

You can in fact duck in and out of cover to avoid them. But not if your foe is just as fast as you and able to stay right on your backside or whatever. There have been times I was even successful in using enemy mechs as cover against an opponent with streaks. But it was more "good timing and luck" than skill (the only skill part was seeing what had happened, and trying to keep the enemy mech between me and the other guy with streaks - and said players lack of awareness of what I was doing, moreso.)

you can also run behind the sSRM carrier to negate lock. but again. effort to reward ratio.

Edited by Tennex, 14 February 2013 - 09:27 AM.

[Orzorn]

Oh, guys, as an aside, I discovered and exploit with SSRMs that allowed you to increase their lock to less than a second, I'd have gauged it at almost a half second. I sent the exploit details to Thomas, but I saw several mechs using it the other day. It adds no additional tonnage, and is RIDICULOUSLY overpowered. If one thought SSRMs took too little skill now, with that exploit, they take less than no skill.

[Z0MBIE Y0SHI]

Orzorn, on 14 February 2013 - 09:28 AM, said:

Oh, guys, as an aside, I discovered and exploit with SSRMs that allowed you to increase their lock to less than a second, I'd have gauged it at almost a half second. I sent the exploit details to Thomas, but I saw several mechs using it the other day. It adds no additional tonnage, and is RIDICULOUSLY overpowered. If one thought SSRMs took too little skill now, with that exploit, they take less than no skill.

I've accidentally done what you're talking about but couldn't figure out exactly how to do it. Glad someone figured it out and reported it.

[Wolfways]

Tennex, on 14 February 2013 - 09:12 AM, said:

the effort required to use LRMs is minimal compared to other weapons.

Yeah because waiting for target lock, firing missiles, waiting for missiles to reach the target while keeping the target locked, meanwhile possibly getting shot to crap as you can't take cover, and hoping the target doesn't reach cover is much easier than direct fire weapons point, click, reach cover.

[Orzorn]

Z0MBIE Y0SHI, on 14 February 2013 - 09:31 AM, said:

I've accidentally done what you're talking about but couldn't figure out exactly how to do it. Glad someone figured it out and reported it.

I know exactly how to do it, but will not disclose that information in this thread. As I said, several people already were using it the self same day I discovered it.

The worst part? I told Thomas about it, and he had not heard of it, nor was it a reported issue. Those players I saw using it were outright exploiting it without reporting it. Disgusting.