111 replies to this topic

[DrxAbstract]

Kunae, on 14 February 2013 - 12:21 PM, said:

I wonder if there wasn't someone else maintaining LoS on you. I've seen that happen sometimes, and it's frustrating until you happen to notice the spider standing off on a little hill watching you.

In the one case, i cant say, but the 2nd time it's simply not possible - he was the only person left alive on his team.

[Kunae]

DrxAbstract, on 14 February 2013 - 12:53 PM, said:

In the one case, i cant say, but the 2nd time it's simply not possible - he was the only person left alive on his team.

Hammer may have the jist of it then.

[RagingOyster]

Look! A bunch of pessimists posting hyperbolic complaints and telling PGI how to do their jobs! How very refreshing!

Also: Tribes failed? News to me.

[Mechteric]

I don't run ECM
I don't run LRMs
I do make a good amount of CBills
I have around a 3.0 K/D ratio
I have fun
Where's the beef nachos?

[Tennex]

RagingOyster, on 14 February 2013 - 01:07 PM, said:

Look! A bunch of pessimists posting hyperbolic complaints and telling PGI how to do their jobs! How very refreshing!

Also: Tribes failed? News to me.

tribes is doing about as well as MWO is right now. (MWO is a beta btw.) If you want to call a game doing as well as a beta, not a failure. well thats like your opinion.

if PGI hopes to move up they should make some changes.

Edited by Tennex, 14 February 2013 - 02:40 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

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

How do you suggest LRMs and SSRMs be fixed?

Make LRMs wire guided. They follow yuor reticle not an auto lock on. This makes it a skill weapon that you need to home in yourself on the enemy.

Make Locks only for when soemthing is tagged by Narc or TAG - this would allow indirect fire only via teamwork.

Make BAP tighten the grouping of your LRMs

This is about the only way to make it a skillful weapon and be useful with ECM the way it is.

SSRMs - relock each shot. less CT seeking

done - problem is solved - then you can relook at other aspects of the balance ecosystem

[Ralgas]

i'm sorry guys making lrms easy mode isn't just about loading a mech full of them and then launching.... without tag, artemis, a good situational and map awareness and teamates that know what *you* are doing lrms will mostly end up dumbfired midflight or splat on the side of terrain

Asmudius Heng, on 14 February 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

Make LRMs wire guided. They follow yuor reticle not an auto lock on. This makes it a skill weapon that you need to home in yourself on the enemy.

Make Locks only for when soemthing is tagged by Narc or TAG - this would allow indirect fire only via teamwork.

Make BAP tighten the grouping of your LRMs

This is about the only way to make it a skillful weapon and be useful with ECM the way it is.

SSRMs - relock each shot. less CT seeking

done - problem is solved - then you can relook at other aspects of the balance ecosystem

lrms are wire guided now, if you dont have a target they aim your reticle, As for wire guide inflight just no. PPC snipers are bad enough, giving people the tools to shoot them over terrain and then drop them on unlocked targets will be worse

don't need bap to tighten groups, artemis does it and scales the penalty for the tighter groups better

Edit: oh and the ppc changes on the 19th are going to change the whole ecm dynamic anyway

Edited by Ralgas, 14 February 2013 - 03:10 PM.

[Asmudius Heng]

Ralgas, on 14 February 2013 - 03:06 PM, said:

i'm sorry guys making lrms easy mode isn't just about loading a mech full of them and then launching.... without tag, artemis, a good situational and map awareness and teamates that know what *you* are doing lrms will mostly end up dumbfired midflight or splat on the side of terrain



lrms are wire guided now, if you dont have a target they aim your reticle, As for wire guide inflight just no. PPC snipers are bad enough, giving people the tools to shoot them over terrain and then drop them on unlocked targets will be worse

don't need bap to tighten groups, artemis does it and scales the penalty for the tighter groups better

Edit: oh and the ppc changes on the 19th are going to change the whole ecm dynamic anyway

I do not believe that LRMs continually follow your reticle. They just launch to the location that your reticle was on. This means that by the time your LRMs get there the target has moved unless they are teh n00b.

What i meant was that LRMs would continually follow your reticle as you aimed it in to your target. This might not be what wire guided means my apologies if i got that wrong.

This would mean it is an aimed weapon in a sense but you could control it as the LRMs fly. Hell you dcould do this and still have the lock on emchanic just so dumb firing isnt so well ... dumb.

[Znail]

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

How do you suggest LRMs and SSRMs be fixed?

I recomend a reduction in damage of LRMs to be closer to the TT values. but in return increase the number of missiles in each ton of ammo.

The problem is that a single salvo of LRMs that land cleanly does a huge amount of damage right now. The devs had to compensate for the doubling of armour on mechs somehow as else so would the LRMs be unable to kill anyone. But it's a lot better to do so be increasing the ammo instead of the damage as that leaves the LRMs able to do their work over extended time, but doesn't give them the current one hit KO punch.

[RagingOyster]

Tennex, on 14 February 2013 - 02:39 PM, said:

tribes is doing about as well as MWO is right now. (MWO is a beta btw.) If you want to call a game doing as well as a beta, not a failure. well thats like your opinion.

if PGI hopes to move up they should make some changes.

Er... what? Yeah I am aware that MWO is in open beta, I have played since early closed beta. It is doing quite well, and if there are this many people playing in the beta hopefully it means more to come at release. Tribes seems to be doing alright. Tons of full servers and solid numbers, though HiRez has not been updating as frequently as they used to. Not sure what you meant by the last part of your comment "If you want to call a game doing as well as a beta, not a failure. well thats like your opinion."

What changes should PGI make if they "hope to move up"?

Asmudius Heng, on 14 February 2013 - 02:49 PM, said:

Make LRMs wire guided. They follow yuor reticle not an auto lock on. This makes it a skill weapon that you need to home in yourself on the enemy.

Make Locks only for when soemthing is tagged by Narc or TAG - this would allow indirect fire only via teamwork.

Make BAP tighten the grouping of your LRMs

This is about the only way to make it a skillful weapon and be useful with ECM the way it is.

SSRMs - relock each shot. less CT seeking

done - problem is solved - then you can relook at other aspects of the balance ecosystem

You do know what a wire-guided missile is, right? It is a missile that literally has a wire attached to it running back to the launcher, which relays info to the missile so it can adjust its flight path to match where the pilot wants the missile to go. What you are suggesting would require multiple kilometer long wires running back to the mech.... which is not only infeasible with volleys of 5-20 missiles (per launcher), but also flies in the face of BT canon. LRMs lock on, and removing their ability to do so destroys an entire portion of their purpose (to provide long range fire support)

BAP is fine as it is. There is already an item that does what you suggested: Artemis tightens your grouping. BAP is designed to increase sensor range and decrease the time it takes to acquire target info.

[Asmudius Heng]

RagingOyster, on 14 February 2013 - 04:27 PM, said:

Er... what? Yeah I am aware that MWO is in open beta, I have played since early closed beta. It is doing quite well, and if there are this many people playing in the beta hopefully it means more to come at release. Tribes seems to be doing alright. Tons of full servers and solid numbers, though HiRez has not been updating as frequently as they used to. Not sure what you meant by the last part of your comment "If you want to call a game doing as well as a beta, not a failure. well thats like your opinion."

What changes should PGI make if they "hope to move up"?


You do know what a wire-guided missile is, right? It is a missile that literally has a wire attached to it running back to the launcher, which relays info to the missile so it can adjust its flight path to match where the pilot wants the missile to go. What you are suggesting would require multiple kilometer long wires running back to the mech.... which is not only infeasible with volleys of 5-20 missiles (per launcher), but also flies in the face of BT canon. LRMs lock on, and removing their ability to do so destroys an entire portion of their purpose (to provide long range fire support)

BAP is fine as it is. There is already an item that does what you suggested: Artemis tightens your grouping. BAP is designed to increase sensor range and decrease the time it takes to acquire target info.

As i said in a further post i probably got the temrinology wrong. I just meant following the reticle as it moves as a path not aiming just to the terrain you point to when you fire.

So my bad on the phrase but i hope the point was still made as this would make it a aiming type wepoan forthe most part and therefore take some skill and co-ordination to get the most out of it

[Wales Grey]

RagingOyster, on 14 February 2013 - 04:27 PM, said:

BAP is fine as it is. There is already an item that does what you suggested: Artemis tightens your grouping. BAP is designed to increase sensor range and decrease the time it takes to acquire target info.

BAP is, quite frankly, mostly wasted tonnage more than 90% of the time. I wish it did something more impressive, like give 300m omni-directional radar.

[Znail]

RagingOyster, on 14 February 2013 - 04:27 PM, said:

BAP is fine as it is. There is already an item that does what you suggested: Artemis tightens your grouping. BAP is designed to increase sensor range and decrease the time it takes to acquire target info.

Actually, the main use for the BAP is ment to be able to detect mechs that are out of LOS. In the TT so is the BAP the powerfull item and ECM is mainly good because it negates the BAP. But with LRMs being buffed well beyond the TT quality in MWO so could the devs not make the BAP the way it is without breaking the game and instead added the ECM features to make LRMs worse rather then follow the TT.

My main problem with this solution is that it breaks the suspension of belief. It doesn't make sense that the ECM makes mechs 'invisible' as you can stand there looking at a mech 300 m away and still not lock onto it. The only type of missle that would even be affected by an ECM in that way would be a radar lock on missle and I really can't see anyone using that for something like Mechs, nor would that work with indirect fire like you can do in this game. Either image recognition or heat seekers would not be bothered by someone having an ECM along.

What does make sense is to have the ECM make it difficult for someone to detect a mech on the other side of mountain and launch LRMs on targets out of line of sight. The romulan cloaking field does not make sense.

Edited by Znail, 14 February 2013 - 04:46 PM.

[Corvus Antaka]

Tribes: Ascend Game of the Year Edition

Great Game. Probably the best & most innovative shooter that does something different with the genre. If I didn't enjoy MWO so much or could clone myself I'd play Tribes instead.

This is of course all PGI's fault for instead making a badass mech game that seems to be getting better daily.

[RagingOyster]

Znail, on 14 February 2013 - 04:42 PM, said:

Actually, the main use for the BAP is ment to be able to detect mechs that are out of LOS. In the TT so is the BAP the powerfull item and ECM is mainly good because it negates the BAP. But with LRMs being buffed well beyond the TT quality in MWO so could the devs not make the BAP the way it is without breaking the game and instead added the ECM features to make LRMs worse rather then follow the TT.

My main problem with this solution is that it breaks the suspension of belief. It doesn't make sense that the ECM makes mechs 'invisible' as you can stand there looking at a mech 300 m away and still not lock onto it. The only type of missle that would even be affected by an ECM in that way would be a radar lock on missle and I really can't see anyone using that for something like Mechs, nor would that work with indirect fire like you can do in this game. Either image recognition or heat seekers would not be bothered by someone having an ECM along.

What does make sense is to have the ECM make it difficult for someone to detect a mech on the other side of mountain and launch LRMs on targets out of line of sight. The romulan cloaking field does not make sense.

I did not say what Beagle does in TT. In MWO, it increases sensor range, decreases the time it takes to get info on the target and lets you target shut-down mechs.

I agree that the way ECM works is silly, and I would like a nerf but people still blow the issue WAY out of proportion. It is not some game-breaking super-item, just something that could stand to be reworked. Either way I continue to play and win like I did before ECM came out and like I will after/if it is changed.

[RagingOyster]

Asmudius Heng, on 14 February 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

As i said in a further post i probably got the temrinology wrong. I just meant following the reticle as it moves as a path not aiming just to the terrain you point to when you fire.

So my bad on the phrase but i hope the point was still made as this would make it a aiming type wepoan forthe most part and therefore take some skill and co-ordination to get the most out of it

I could not disagree more. Requiring players to keep the reticule trained on the target would make LRMs literally useless in virtually every situation. LRMs are supposed to be "Lock on; fire; forget" weapons. I like the current lock-on system. You realize that if you lose lock while the missiles are in-flight then they continue to track the last location the target was before you lost lock so if they move into cover the missiles will come down wherever they were last time you saw them. Indirect fire is not fully possible without team mates, so no targeting nerf is needed at all.

What might be needed is a minor damage decrease.

Wales Grey, on 14 February 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

BAP is, quite frankly, mostly wasted tonnage more than 90% of the time. I wish it did something more impressive, like give 300m omni-directional radar.

Agreed, but I was just pointing out that BAP already has a function and there is an item that does exactly what the poster i was responding to wants.

[Asmudius Heng]

RagingOyster, on 14 February 2013 - 04:56 PM, said:

I could not disagree more. Requiring players to keep the reticule trained on the target would make LRMs literally useless in virtually every situation. LRMs are supposed to be "Lock on; fire; forget" weapons. I like the current lock-on system. You realize that if you lose lock while the missiles are in-flight then they continue to track the last location the target was before you lost lock so if they move into cover the missiles will come down wherever they were last time you saw them. Indirect fire is not fully possible without team mates, so no targeting nerf is needed at all.

What might be needed is a minor damage decrease.


Agreed, but I was just pointing out that BAP already has a function and there is an item that does exactly what the poster i was responding to wants.

Well - you need to keep your reticle on the enemy now still to hold the lock, with the ability to move away for a breif period so its not that much difference.

Indirect fire would require a lock but teamwork to achieve - but its ok to agree to disagree - thee are many ways to fix these things but it is a tangled ecosystem of more than just damage as the only modifier is all i am saying.

[anonymous175]

Thats what happens when Jenga never joins the Diamond dudes.

[LaserAngel]

Wales Grey, on 14 February 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

BAP is, quite frankly, mostly wasted tonnage more than 90% of the time. I wish it did something more impressive, like give 300m omni-directional radar.

More like 120m but I agree.

[Ralgas]

Wales Grey, on 14 February 2013 - 04:36 PM, said:

BAP is, quite frankly, mostly wasted tonnage more than 90% of the time. I wish it did something more impressive, like give 300m omni-directional radar.

where ecm is in use, true. i do find combining bap+ sensor module on my 3l quite a good way to light up snipers and enemy lrms for our forces from 1/2 a map away though .

Alpine may give it some legs, depending on exactly how big it is.

Oh and heng, reread my post you quoted. I explained why your fly-by-wire as you understand it idea would be a whole new level of op and take away the cover protection smart non ecm users enjoy now from lrms.